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 03-17-2010, 08:01 PM
Bill Nottingham
 
Default F-13 Branched report: 20100317 changes

Bruno Wolff III (bruno@wolff.to) said:
> > > fedora-easy-karma-0-0.3.20100306git00fc20aa.fc12.noarch requires fedora-packager >= 0:0.4.0
> >
> > This is unexpected behaviour of Fedora for me. Why is the package from
> > F12 automatically added to the F13 repo? The current situation is, that
> > I did not push fedora-easy-karma from testing to stable in F13, because
> > fedora-packager >= 0.4.0 is still in testing there, but it is in stable
> > in F12, which is why I only pushed it to stable for F12 now.
>
> dist-f13 inherits from dist-f12-updates so once something makes it to
> F12 stable it will start showing up in F13.

... although we may be changing this behavior shortly. Jesse?

Bill
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-17-2010, 08:25 PM
Jesse Keating
 
Default F-13 Branched report: 20100317 changes

On Wed, 2010-03-17 at 17:01 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Bruno Wolff III (bruno@wolff.to) said:
> > > > fedora-easy-karma-0-0.3.20100306git00fc20aa.fc12.noarch requires fedora-packager >= 0:0.4.0
> > >
> > > This is unexpected behaviour of Fedora for me. Why is the package from
> > > F12 automatically added to the F13 repo? The current situation is, that
> > > I did not push fedora-easy-karma from testing to stable in F13, because
> > > fedora-packager >= 0.4.0 is still in testing there, but it is in stable
> > > in F12, which is why I only pushed it to stable for F12 now.
> >
> > dist-f13 inherits from dist-f12-updates so once something makes it to
> > F12 stable it will start showing up in F13.
>
> ... although we may be changing this behavior shortly. Jesse?
>
> Bill

ngggh. I killed the inheritance for all the existing packages, but new
packages can still sneak through, as there is nothing already tagged in
dist-f13.

This is something of a difficult problem. We want the packages and
ownership and other info to be inherited forward, just not the build
tags. I'm going to have to think on this for a bit.

--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom˛ is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-17-2010, 08:47 PM
Peter Robinson
 
Default F-13 Branched report: 20100317 changes

>> * * * * hornsey-1.5.2-0.1.fc13.i686 requires libclutter-gst-0.10.so.0

This is a known issue and should be resolved shortly. Its part of
'Moblin' and well the whole state is in 'flux'..... watch this (well
maybe not this one) space.... basically more will be known soon!

>> * * * * pyclutter-gst-0.9.2-1.fc12.i686 requires
>> libclutter-gst-0.10.so.0

I'll look at this one as well if no one else does.

> Is anybody working on these, or should releng be taking a crack at it?

Peter
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-17-2010, 11:36 PM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default F-13 Branched report: 20100317 changes

Till Maas wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 06:49:41PM +0000, Branched Report wrote:
>
>> fedora-easy-karma-0-0.3.20100306git00fc20aa.fc12.noarch requires
>> fedora-packager >= 0:0.4.0
>
> This is unexpected behaviour of Fedora for me. Why is the package from
> F12 automatically added to the F13 repo? The current situation is, that
> I did not push fedora-easy-karma from testing to stable in F13, because
> fedora-packager >= 0.4.0 is still in testing there, but it is in stable
> in F12, which is why I only pushed it to stable for F12 now.

Both fedora-easy-karma and fedora-packager are breaking upgrade paths, this
inheritance problem is just another side effect of that. The packages have
to be pushed to stable either simultaneously or in decreasing release order.
Both the fedora-packager maintainer and you: please queue your F13 updates
to stable ASAP to fix the upgrade path (which will also fix this inheritance
glitch). (And yes, fedora-packager needs to be pushed first, that's the
first offender here.) And next time please don't push out a F12 update
without pushing out the equivalent update for F13 first or at the same time.

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-18-2010, 12:32 AM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default F-13 Branched report: 20100317 changes

I wrote:
> Both fedora-easy-karma and fedora-packager are breaking upgrade paths,
> this inheritance problem is just another side effect of that. The packages
> have to be pushed to stable either simultaneously or in decreasing release
> order. Both the fedora-packager maintainer and you: please queue your F13
> updates to stable ASAP to fix the upgrade path (which will also fix this
> inheritance glitch). (And yes, fedora-packager needs to be pushed first,
> that's the first offender here.) And next time please don't push out a F12
> update without pushing out the equivalent update for F13 first or at the
> same time.

PS: The main cause for this kind of problems is people insisting on separate
testing per release. IMHO updates should go out to all releases at the same
time, based on the sum of the testing done for all of them, then we won't
have such upgrade path problems, ever.

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-18-2010, 01:47 AM
Chris Adams
 
Default F-13 Branched report: 20100317 changes

Once upon a time, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@chello.at> said:
> PS: The main cause for this kind of problems is people insisting on separate
> testing per release. IMHO updates should go out to all releases at the same
> time, based on the sum of the testing done for all of them, then we won't
> have such upgrade path problems, ever.

It shouldn't be based on the sum, as that would mean positives for one
release could override negatives for another. If you want to require
simultaneous pushes, they should only be after testing for each release
is known good. Just because something works on F12 doesn't mean it
doesn't break things on F11.
--
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 03-18-2010, 04:49 AM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default F-13 Branched report: 20100317 changes

Chris Adams wrote:
> It shouldn't be based on the sum, as that would mean positives for one
> release could override negatives for another.

That's kinda the whole point. "Kinda" because of course negatives should not
be ignored, but that's always true, even if the positives are for the same
release! They need to be checked for validity (e.g. longstanding breakage
which is not a regression nor the one bug supposed to be fixed is not a
valid reason to reject the update, but I've seen even more blatantly invalid
complaints), and fixed if valid, not outvoted. (This just shows again how
numeric karma is flawed. It's really stupid to rely on that number for
anything serious.) But my point is that lack of positives for some release
should indeed be ignored if there's enough positive feedback for the exact
same update on some other release.

> If you want to require simultaneous pushes, they should only be after
> testing for each release is known good.

First of all, I don't want to REQUIRE anything, but RECOMMEND things. We
already have enough rules we're required to follow, and unfortunately more
(and completely unnecessary ones at that) are coming soon. :-(

And secondly, my suggestion is to assume that positive feedback on release n
+ no complaints on release m = the package is fine on release m as well
(which has a probability very close to 1 in practice, especially if it's
built from the same specfile in both cases).

> Just because something works on F12 doesn't mean it doesn't break things
> on F11.

Theoretically yes, but in practice it's extremely unlikely.

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-18-2010, 07:35 AM
Till Maas
 
Default F-13 Branched report: 20100317 changes

On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 01:36:59AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:

> Both fedora-easy-karma and fedora-packager are breaking upgrade paths, this
> inheritance problem is just another side effect of that. The packages have
> to be pushed to stable either simultaneously or in decreasing release order.
> Both the fedora-packager maintainer and you: please queue your F13 updates
> to stable ASAP to fix the upgrade path (which will also fix this inheritance
> glitch). (And yes, fedora-packager needs to be pushed first, that's the
> first offender here.) And next time please don't push out a F12 update
> without pushing out the equivalent update for F13 first or at the same time.

These requirements render the karma automatism useless for all branches
except F13, because the fedora-packager package in F12 was iirc pushed
automatically after it received enough testing. If this implies, that
that the package should also be pushed in F13, then this should happen
automatically, too. Automatic default behaviour that leads to failure
should not exist.

Regards
Till
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-18-2010, 07:39 AM
Till Maas
 
Default F-13 Branched report: 20100317 changes

On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 02:32:35AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> I wrote:
> > Both fedora-easy-karma and fedora-packager are breaking upgrade paths,
> > this inheritance problem is just another side effect of that. The packages
> > have to be pushed to stable either simultaneously or in decreasing release
> > order. Both the fedora-packager maintainer and you: please queue your F13
> > updates to stable ASAP to fix the upgrade path (which will also fix this
> > inheritance glitch). (And yes, fedora-packager needs to be pushed first,
> > that's the first offender here.) And next time please don't push out a F12
> > update without pushing out the equivalent update for F13 first or at the
> > same time.
>
> PS: The main cause for this kind of problems is people insisting on separate
> testing per release. IMHO updates should go out to all releases at the same
> time, based on the sum of the testing done for all of them, then we won't
> have such upgrade path problems, ever.

It would be enough to only push the update that got enough testing and
all updates in newer releases to keep the upgrade path.

Regards
Till
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-18-2010, 03:52 PM
Jesse Keating
 
Default F-13 Branched report: 20100317 changes

On Thu, 2010-03-18 at 02:32 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> I wrote:
> > Both fedora-easy-karma and fedora-packager are breaking upgrade paths,
> > this inheritance problem is just another side effect of that. The packages
> > have to be pushed to stable either simultaneously or in decreasing release
> > order. Both the fedora-packager maintainer and you: please queue your F13
> > updates to stable ASAP to fix the upgrade path (which will also fix this
> > inheritance glitch). (And yes, fedora-packager needs to be pushed first,
> > that's the first offender here.) And next time please don't push out a F12
> > update without pushing out the equivalent update for F13 first or at the
> > same time.
>
> PS: The main cause for this kind of problems is people insisting on separate
> testing per release. IMHO updates should go out to all releases at the same
> time, based on the sum of the testing done for all of them, then we won't
> have such upgrade path problems, ever.
>
> Kevin Kofler
>

We do separate testing per release, because each release is different.
Different library sets, different kernels, glibc, some different desktop
environments, etc... Assuming that testing on one release means that
it'll work on other releases is grossly irresponsible.

--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom˛ is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 06:28 AM.

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