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 03-03-2010, 12:55 AM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default Worthless updates

Jesse Keating wrote:
> No data in the bodhi ticket.
>
> Rpm changelog says "Upstream update"

This sucks. While it's fine for the RPM changelog to say that, it'd need
something more useful in the update notes, at which point the maintainer
would also have noticed the futility of this particular update.

> If I google for upstream and look for a changelog, I come to this:
> Ok... removing deprecated uses is a questionable at best update, but
> here is the kicker. The perl in F11 is perl-5.10.0-82.fc11. So these
> functions aren't actually deprecated in F11. So... why is this update
> going out? What possible benefit does the user get from this? Does
> anybody see this as a reasonable update to publish on F11?

I sure don't. I want new versions where it makes sense. This one clearly
doesn't.

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-03-2010, 01:07 AM
Seth Vidal
 
Default Worthless updates

On Tue, 2 Mar 2010, Jesse Keating wrote:
> Ok... removing deprecated uses is a questionable at best update, but
> here is the kicker. The perl in F11 is perl-5.10.0-82.fc11. So these
> functions aren't actually deprecated in F11. So... why is this update
> going out? What possible benefit does the user get from this? Does
> anybody see this as a reasonable update to publish on F11?
>

the suggestion I had made at fudcon went something like this:

1. all packages being put in as updates would need to be marked as per
the type of update. the default is 'trivial'. Options might include: new
pkg, trivial, feature, bugfix, security

2. We would issue security updates whenever they happened. Issue bugfix
updates once every 2 weeks. Everything else once a month.

it would curtail this sort of thing, it seems to me and let us control our
updates AND testing cycle.

I've been thinking about the obvious problems of how we make it so you can
build those properly and I think we would need more targets to build
against, but I think that's do-able.

-sv


--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-03-2010, 01:31 AM
Ralf Corsepius
 
Default Worthless updates

On 03/03/2010 02:29 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> It took me all of about 2 minutes to find a worthless pending update for
> Fedora 11.
Hip shot

> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Locale-Maketext-Lexicon-0.78-1.fc11
>
> No data in the bodhi ticket.
>
> Rpm changelog says "Upstream update"
>
> If I google for upstream and look for a changelog, I come to this:
>
> http://cpansearch.perl.org/src/DRTECH/Locale-Maketext-Lexicon-0.79/Changes
>
> in which the grand total of changes between what shipped with F11, and
> what is in this update is:
>
> * Locale::Maketext::Lexicon::Tie
> - Removed a deprecated use of "defined %" for Perl 5.11+
>
> * Locale::Maketext::Lexicon
> - Removed a deprecated use of "defined %" for Perl 5.11+
>
> Ok... removing deprecated uses is a questionable at best update, but
> here is the kicker. The perl in F11 is perl-5.10.0-82.fc11. So these
> functions aren't actually deprecated in F11. So... why is this update
> going out? What possible benefit does the user get from this?
Keeping the rpms in sync with CPAN.

> Does
> anybody see this as a reasonable update to publish on F11?
If you'd use perl you'd know.

Ralf


--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-03-2010, 01:40 AM
Chris Weyl
 
Default Worthless updates

On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 5:29 PM, Jesse Keating <jkeating@redhat.com> wrote:
> It took me all of about 2 minutes to find a worthless pending update for
> Fedora 11.

Before we get into this, do we have any consensus on empirical
standards for determining what a "worthless" update is? Judging by
the vigorous commentary on this list, I suspect that while many would
agree with you, and just many others would disagree with you as to the
merits of this update.

Also... It might not hurt to pick less pejorative language, as it's
very easy to take offense at one's work being called "worthless".
e.g. I don't use KDE, but I certainly don't consider the amazing
amount of work the KDE SIG puts in "worthless" -- anything but, in
fact.

-Chris
--
Chris Weyl
Ex astris, scientia
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-03-2010, 02:02 AM
Ralf Corsepius
 
Default Worthless updates

On 03/03/2010 02:55 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Jesse Keating wrote:
>> No data in the bodhi ticket.
>>
>> Rpm changelog says "Upstream update"
>
> This sucks.
Your bikeshed ...

> While it's fine for the RPM changelog to say that, it'd need
> something more useful in the update notes, at which point the maintainer
> would also have noticed the futility of this particular update.

>> If I google for upstream and look for a changelog, I come to this:
>> Ok... removing deprecated uses is a questionable at best update, but
>> here is the kicker. The perl in F11 is perl-5.10.0-82.fc11. So these
>> functions aren't actually deprecated in F11. So... why is this update
>> going out? What possible benefit does the user get from this? Does
>> anybody see this as a reasonable update to publish on F11?
>
> I sure don't.
If you'd use perl you'd know the reason: CPAN.

> I want new versions where it makes sense. This one clearly
> doesn't.
Thanks for providing evidence on

a) bodhi's uselessness for feedback.

b) how easy it is to cast violent, hostile hip-shot from the background
of lack of backgrounds.

Ralf
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-03-2010, 02:24 AM
Chris Adams
 
Default Worthless updates

Once upon a time, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@freenet.de> said:
> On 03/03/2010 02:29 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > What possible benefit does the user get from this?
> Keeping the rpms in sync with CPAN.

What is the benefit to the user in keeping the RPMS in sync with CPAN?
Nothing of consequence (at least according to the source changelog)
changed with respect to perl in F11.

> If you'd use perl you'd know.

I use perl and have for years; I don't update every module every time
there's a new update on CPAN; I update when there's a bugfix that
affects my platform (a bugfix that only affects perl 5.11 users doesn't
affect F11 users) or when there's a new feature I need.

--
Chris Adams <cmadams@hiwaay.net>
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-03-2010, 02:38 AM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default Worthless updates

Seth Vidal wrote:
> 2. We would issue security updates whenever they happened. Issue bugfix
> updates once every 2 weeks. Everything else once a month.

And make regression fixes wait for 2 weeks? Very bad plan. (And no matter
how much testing you do, there will ALWAYS be regressions discovered in
stable.)

It'd also suck for things which get frequently updated, e.g. KDE bugfix
upgrades. Depending on schedules, we might be already working on the next
KDE when the previous one finally gets pushed.

And in addition, it'd suck for our users which would get a huge update
taking hours, or even days if their connection is slow, instead of frequent
updates taking a couple minutes each. For many people, especially with
slower connections, this is a dealbreaker.

> it would curtail this sort of thing, it seems to me

Not really. The trivial updates would still go out, you'd just get a ton of
trivial updates once a month.

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-03-2010, 02:50 AM
Ralf Corsepius
 
Default Worthless updates

On 03/03/2010 04:24 AM, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Ralf Corsepius<rc040203@freenet.de> said:
>> On 03/03/2010 02:29 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
>>> What possible benefit does the user get from this?
>> Keeping the rpms in sync with CPAN.
>
> What is the benefit to the user in keeping the RPMS in sync with CPAN?

Cpan is being used to keep a perl-installation "current". Running it on
Fedora (or other system which come with a vendor supplied perl),
replaces all "non-current" perl-modules with those which are marked
"current" in CPAN.

I.e. to keep the difference between CPAN and a "vendor supplied" perl
minimal, it's advisable to keep the "vendor supplied" perl in sync with
CPAN.

Or to put it differently: To keep a vendor supplied perl usable for perl
developers, it's advisable to keep vendor-supplied "perl-modules" as
close as possible to CPAN - This had been the strategy in Fedora ever
since Fedora is around.

Or differently: If we don't keep perl-modules in Fedora's perl "CPAN
current", we sooner or later will not be able to add other perl-modules
to Fedora or to upgrade other perl-modules, which e.g. carry
hard-dependencies to these "not upgraded modules" to Fedora

Or yet differently: CPAN and rpm are colliding packaging/installation
systems.

Finally: Keeping perl-modules in Fedora in sync helps users from
"killing" their "vender-supplied" perl installation, by mixing it up
with CPAN - Issues resulting from such kind of mixtures very commonly
are the cause of issues perl-users are reporting against Fedora's "perl".

> Nothing of consequence (at least according to the source changelog)
> changed with respect to perl in F11.
Simply wait for a perl-module to BR: perl(xxx) > "version in Fedora"

>> If you'd use perl you'd know.
>
> I use perl and have for years; I don't update every module every time
> there's a new update on CPAN;
c.f. above.

> I update when there's a bugfix that
> affects my platform (a bugfix that only affects perl 5.11 users doesn't
> affect F11 users) or when there's a new feature I need.
Wait until you will want to address a "serious/critical" bugfix to a
perl-module which carries a dependency on a perl-module you haven't kept
in sync with CPAN => You'd have to resort to either "fastestly" upgrade
a series of perl-modules or resort to other solutions (E.g. to
deliberately remove versioned dependencies from rpm and try to get away
without them.)

Ralf



--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-03-2010, 02:57 AM
Toshio Kuratomi
 
Default Worthless updates

On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 09:07:29PM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 2 Mar 2010, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > Ok... removing deprecated uses is a questionable at best update, but
> > here is the kicker. The perl in F11 is perl-5.10.0-82.fc11. So these
> > functions aren't actually deprecated in F11. So... why is this update
> > going out? What possible benefit does the user get from this? Does
> > anybody see this as a reasonable update to publish on F11?
> >
>
> the suggestion I had made at fudcon went something like this:
>
> 1. all packages being put in as updates would need to be marked as per
> the type of update. the default is 'trivial'. Options might include: new
> pkg, trivial, feature, bugfix, security
>
> 2. We would issue security updates whenever they happened. Issue bugfix
> updates once every 2 weeks. Everything else once a month.
>
> it would curtail this sort of thing, it seems to me and let us control our
> updates AND testing cycle.
>
> I've been thinking about the obvious problems of how we make it so you can
> build those properly and I think we would need more targets to build
> against, but I think that's do-able.
>
FWIW, +1 to this general outline.

-Toshio
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-03-2010, 03:04 AM
Chris Adams
 
Default Worthless updates

Once upon a time, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@freenet.de> said:
> Cpan is being used to keep a perl-installation "current".

Trying to mix CPAN and RPM managed perl modules is a recipie for
disaster already. That's not a good reason for a meaningless update.

> > I update when there's a bugfix that
> > affects my platform (a bugfix that only affects perl 5.11 users doesn't
> > affect F11 users) or when there's a new feature I need.
> Wait until you will want to address a "serious/critical" bugfix to a
> perl-module which carries a dependency on a perl-module you haven't kept
> in sync with CPAN

That's a good reason to update the depended-upon modules. Can you show
a case where a module version that was only updated for compatibility
with a newer version of perl was required?

--
Chris Adams <cmadams@hiwaay.net>
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:15 PM.

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