FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 12-13-2008, 01:37 PM
Chuck Anderson
 
Default Fedora QA ? - What Fedora makes sucking for me - or why I am NOT Fedora

On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 03:33:43PM +0100, Robert Scheck wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Dec 2008, Chuck Anderson wrote:
> > Given that Bodhi updates bugzilla reports when updates are pushed,
> > maybe it can be made to update them with karma and comments too?
>
> could be an interesting beginning, yes.
>
> > If there were PK integration, there could be lots of interesting ways
> > to allow the user to interact with the update system, such as
> > single-click karma reporting back to bodhi, displaying the karma on
> > updates to the user so they can choose whether to update that package
> > or not, setting a preference that says somthing like "wait until karma
> > gets to +3 before defaulting the checkbox to enabled to update this
> > package".
>
> The reporting should be always possible, as it maybe turns later out if an
> update was broken or not. And how a about yum? If it's PackageKit-only it
> is not really an advantage, given that unexperienced users won't rate such
> updates anyway usually (at least from my point of view).

PK already has features that yum does not--it shows metadata about
updates that yum doesn't, for example.

Experienced users can use the bodhi web interface or bodhi
command-line client (not sure the latter can do karma).

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 12-14-2008, 12:57 PM
Chuck Anderson
 
Default Fedora QA ? - What Fedora makes sucking for me - or why I am NOT Fedora

On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 09:47:57PM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Dec 2008, Chuck Anderson wrote:
>> PK already has features that yum does not--it shows metadata about
>> updates that yum doesn't, for example.
>
> It does? what metadata would that be? Considering all the info PK has
> about packages it gets FROM yum I don't see how that's possible.

Yum doesn't show the user the type of the update: security vs. bugfix
vs. enhancement. It also doesn't show the user the update comments,
nor any suggested logout/login or reboot actions after the updates are
applied. I believe the data comes from updateinfo.xml.gz in the repo.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 12-14-2008, 01:51 PM
Robert Scheck
 
Default Fedora QA ? - What Fedora makes sucking for me - or why I am NOT Fedora

On Sat, 13 Dec 2008, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> BTW, was "automatic feedback from the clients to bodhi" discussed
> already somewhere in this thread? E.g. if the package maintainer could
> see in bodhi "2500 users installed and ran this testin-update for at
> least three days, no negative karma reported, no new bugs" then it
> should be quite save to move the package.

That idea seems *very* interesting to me. Especially the result, that there
maybe have been no issues with the update. And if we could extend that even
to non-testing packages, but to regular updates, we even should get, if our
testing results are representative...

AFAIK we anyway don't have something reporting the packager how many people
are using his package. I might be wrong, but Debian has such a tool now for
years - IIRC not with the same goal as in our case, but I got told, it is
useful to the packagers and maintainers there.

Are there possible load issues for such an idea on or around the Fedora
Infrastructure?


Greetings,
Robert

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 12-14-2008, 07:28 PM
Robert Scheck
 
Default Fedora QA ? - What Fedora makes sucking for me - or why I am NOT Fedora

Hello Michael,

On Fri, 12 Dec 2008, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> The problem Fedora has is that updates-testing is not popular enough.

well, this is not the only problem. There's also a thinking of, that the
repository contains buggy packages, broken dependencies and other stuff,
which will eat your baby. And of course that's partitially right. Maybe it
doesn't eat the Fedora system, but who can be sure when it's testing?

I think, that's an unresolvable issue, but there are enough users out
there, which will never enable updates-testing because of this thinking.
But less testing makes updates-testing and even updates not better (if some
testing happens at all).

> Whenever someone says "Fedora is community-driven" I'd really like to see
> that it means "update pkg foo passed the testing done by a group of
> power-users" and not just "Fedora provides a system where a single package
> maintainer is free to unleash a pkg and burden the community with breakage".

I like also to see the idea, where the installations of a package are
counted and reported to the maintainer who can compare the number with
issues and problems reported for. E.g. 100 installations of an updated
package where no new issues where reported for.


Greetings,
Robert

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:30 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org