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 04-09-2010, 11:10 PM
Matt McCutchen
 
Default Bodhi allows resubmitting an update with different packages?!

The log of the following update shows that it was submitted five times,
I assume with newer packages each time:

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/NetworkManager-0.8.0-6.git20100408.fc12,ModemManager-0.3-9.git20100409.fc12

The top of the page now shows the newest package versions, but much of
the feedback referred to older versions, which are not listed. IMO,
this is a terribly confusing practice and Bodhi shouldn't allow it. New
packages should be submitted in a new update so that feedback remains
associated with the correct package versions.

Thoughts? Am I missing something?

--
Matt

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 04-09-2010, 11:20 PM
Till Maas
 
Default Bodhi allows resubmitting an update with different packages?!

On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 07:10:59PM -0400, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> The log of the following update shows that it was submitted five times,
> I assume with newer packages each time:
>
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/NetworkManager-0.8.0-6.git20100408.fc12,ModemManager-0.3-9.git20100409.fc12
>
> The top of the page now shows the newest package versions, but much of
> the feedback referred to older versions, which are not listed. IMO,
> this is a terribly confusing practice and Bodhi shouldn't allow it. New
> packages should be submitted in a new update so that feedback remains
> associated with the correct package versions.
>
> Thoughts? Am I missing something?

There are nine bugs mentioned in the update. Do you really suggest that
the update submitter should always manually copy them from an old update
to a new update?

But it would be nice if Bodhi would support to create a new update using
an old update as a template, then editing the builds attached to an
update would probably not be needed.

Regards
Till
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 04-09-2010, 11:26 PM
Dan Williams
 
Default Bodhi allows resubmitting an update with different packages?!

On Sat, 2010-04-10 at 01:20 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 07:10:59PM -0400, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> > The log of the following update shows that it was submitted five times,
> > I assume with newer packages each time:
> >
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/NetworkManager-0.8.0-6.git20100408.fc12,ModemManager-0.3-9.git20100409.fc12
> >
> > The top of the page now shows the newest package versions, but much of
> > the feedback referred to older versions, which are not listed. IMO,
> > this is a terribly confusing practice and Bodhi shouldn't allow it. New
> > packages should be submitted in a new update so that feedback remains
> > associated with the correct package versions.
> >
> > Thoughts? Am I missing something?
>
> There are nine bugs mentioned in the update. Do you really suggest that
> the update submitter should always manually copy them from an old update
> to a new update?
>
> But it would be nice if Bodhi would support to create a new update using
> an old update as a template, then editing the builds attached to an
> update would probably not be needed.

That would be nice. Though in the end, as long as the update has not
reached stable, is editing a testing update to fix regressions really
that big of a deal...

Dan

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 04-09-2010, 11:32 PM
Jeff Spaleta
 
Default Bodhi allows resubmitting an update with different packages?!

On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 3:10 PM, Matt McCutchen <matt@mattmccutchen.net> wrote:
> Thoughts? *Am I missing something?


When someone is publishing updates and putting them into testing
specifically to address known bugs... and they get the fix wrong in
some way... I think its perfectly acceptable to reuse the same update
notice for the testing packages in order to do a series of such test
packages...letting intermediate test packages expire out of existence.

You can make the same argument about confusion in the bugzilla
comments to. Unless people take the time to state which version they
are using in every comment if there are several intermediate attempts
to fix a bug handed out to users..whether it be via bodhi or even just
koji builds..bug reports get harder to follow...unless people state
which versions they are testing. And I certainly wouldn't expect
people to refile a new bug report each time a testing package is spun
up just to keep the flow of commentary clear as to which version
everyone was referring to when they were providing feedback.

-jef
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 04-09-2010, 11:52 PM
Matt McCutchen
 
Default Bodhi allows resubmitting an update with different packages?!

On Sat, 2010-04-10 at 01:20 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
> There are nine bugs mentioned in the update. Do you really suggest that
> the update submitter should always manually copy them from an old update
> to a new update?

Yes. What's so hard about that? It's a single copy and paste.

> But it would be nice if Bodhi would support to create a new update using
> an old update as a template, then editing the builds attached to an
> update would probably not be needed.

I entered a ticket:

https://fedorahosted.org/bodhi/ticket/413

--
Matt

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 04-09-2010, 11:57 PM
Matt McCutchen
 
Default Bodhi allows resubmitting an update with different packages?!

On Fri, 2010-04-09 at 15:32 -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> When someone is publishing updates and putting them into testing
> specifically to address known bugs... and they get the fix wrong in
> some way... I think its perfectly acceptable to reuse the same update
> notice for the testing packages in order to do a series of such test
> packages...letting intermediate test packages expire out of existence.
>
> You can make the same argument about confusion in the bugzilla
> comments to. Unless people take the time to state which version they
> are using in every comment if there are several intermediate attempts
> to fix a bug handed out to users..whether it be via bodhi or even just
> koji builds..bug reports get harder to follow...unless people state
> which versions they are testing. And I certainly wouldn't expect
> people to refile a new bug report each time a testing package is spun
> up just to keep the flow of commentary clear as to which version
> everyone was referring to when they were providing feedback.

The comparison to bugs is not valid. A bug is the same bug until it is
fixed. An update consisting of different packages is a different
update.

--
Matt

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 

Thread Tools




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

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