[CentOS-devel] Why not a fusion between CentOS and SL?
Lamar Owen
lowen at pari.eduThu Mar 24 21:02:16 UTC 2011
- Previous message: [CentOS-devel] Why not a fusion between CentOS and SL?
- Next message: [CentOS-devel] Why not a fusion between CentOS and SL?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Thursday, March 24, 2011 04:44:43 pm Karanbir Singh wrote: > 1) the QA team guys are very wired up to this process [snip] > 2) We only ever sign packages once they are accepted; and only signed > packages are pushed publicly [snip] > None of that probably answers your question. No, these two items do answer what I really wanted to know very nicely, at least to my satisfaction, thanks much for taking the time to answer. In a nutshell, the QA people only ever work with unsigned packages, you keep them tagged with unique tag ID's, and when it's signed it's Golden. While this thread has taken a few sweeping off-topic turns (not a small number of which I'm sure I'm at least partially responsible for), I've learned yet a little more about these processes, and I hope others have as well.
- Previous message: [CentOS-devel] Why not a fusion between CentOS and SL?
- Next message: [CentOS-devel] Why not a fusion between CentOS and SL?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the CentOS-devel mailing list