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 05-14-2008, 10:01 PM
Patrice Dumas
 
Default rawhide bugs becoming F-9 bugs

Hello,

Some rawhide bugs are turned into F-9 bugs (automatically). It is wrong,
rawhide bugs should be converted much sooner, maybe during final freeze,
now rawhide bugs are for F-10 and shouldn't be turned into F-9 bugs.

--
Pat

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-14-2008, 11:49 PM
"Jon Stanley"
 
Default rawhide bugs becoming F-9 bugs

On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 6:01 PM, Patrice Dumas <pertusus@free.fr> wrote:

> Some rawhide bugs are turned into F-9 bugs (automatically). It is wrong,
> rawhide bugs should be converted much sooner, maybe during final freeze,
> now rawhide bugs are for F-10 and shouldn't be turned into F-9 bugs.

We had intended for this event to coincide with the unfreezing of
rawhide for F10 content. Unfortunately, due to some technical
difficulties, it didn't occur until about a day later (we were
checking our queries for sanity, since we didn't want to get this
wrong, and found some inconsistencies, actually caused by a bug in
Bugzilla). Therefore, most of the action was correct. There may be a
few bugs that made the cut that shouldn't have, but not many.

Sorry again, we'll do better next time. If you need help
mass-changing bugs (doubtful) drop by #fedora-qa and we'll help you
out.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-14-2008, 11:55 PM
Patrice Dumas
 
Default rawhide bugs becoming F-9 bugs

On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 07:49:48PM -0400, Jon Stanley wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 6:01 PM, Patrice Dumas <pertusus@free.fr> wrote:
>
> > Some rawhide bugs are turned into F-9 bugs (automatically). It is wrong,
> > rawhide bugs should be converted much sooner, maybe during final freeze,
> > now rawhide bugs are for F-10 and shouldn't be turned into F-9 bugs.
>
> We had intended for this event to coincide with the unfreezing of
> rawhide for F10 content. Unfortunately, due to some technical

I think that you should do this before, when cvs branching has been
done and devel branch is for the next release, indeed at that point, and
even though rawhide is still frozen work has begun on rawhide (you just
have to look at the amount of change in the first update...).

--
Pat

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-15-2008, 03:37 AM
Andrew Farris
 
Default rawhide bugs becoming F-9 bugs

Patrice Dumas wrote:

On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 07:49:48PM -0400, Jon Stanley wrote:

On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 6:01 PM, Patrice Dumas <pertusus@free.fr> wrote:


Some rawhide bugs are turned into F-9 bugs (automatically). It is wrong,
rawhide bugs should be converted much sooner, maybe during final freeze,
now rawhide bugs are for F-10 and shouldn't be turned into F-9 bugs.

We had intended for this event to coincide with the unfreezing of
rawhide for F10 content. Unfortunately, due to some technical


I think that you should do this before, when cvs branching has been
done and devel branch is for the next release, indeed at that point, and
even though rawhide is still frozen work has begun on rawhide (you just
have to look at the amount of change in the first update...).


There were MANY duplicate bugs and some new bugs filed against rawhide which are
F9 bugs in the last week before release... doing that change early would
completely defeat the purpose of doing it at all. IMO the week of release might
work fine, but there will always be some overlap that occurs when the bug triage
people try to do this task. If they go early, then some F9 bugs will stay
rawhide and should not. If they go later, then the first early filed F10 bugs
might get changed...


It would be better for people to seriously take a breather and wait on reporting
F10 bugs on that first repo build for F10... there will obviously be many bugs
and it'd be simpler to start posting them a week after the release.


--
Andrew Farris <lordmorgul@gmail.com> www.lordmorgul.net
gpg 0x8300BF29 fingerprint 071D FFE0 4CBC 13FC 7DEB 5BD5 5F89 8E1B 8300 BF29

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-15-2008, 07:29 AM
"Nicolas Mailhot"
 
Default rawhide bugs becoming F-9 bugs

Le Jeu 15 mai 2008 05:37, Andrew Farris a écrit :

> It would be better for people to seriously take a breather and wait on
> reporting
> F10 bugs on that first repo build for F10... there will obviously be
> many bugs
> and it'd be simpler to start posting them a week after the release.

It does not works that way.
People report bugs when they hit them.
Some issues are obviously a Fn+1 target even before Fn is released, if
only because of the level of changes needed to fix them.

That's the real world. Real world is not simple.

--
Nicolas Mailhot

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-15-2008, 09:02 AM
Patrice Dumas
 
Default rawhide bugs becoming F-9 bugs

On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 08:37:23PM -0700, Andrew Farris wrote:
>
> There were MANY duplicate bugs and some new bugs filed against rawhide
> which are F9 bugs in the last week before release... doing that change

But aren't they rawhide bugs too? It is much better to have those bugs
opened against the latest version of fedora, having to go through
bugzilla just to say "hey, don't close my bug" as unfrequently as
possible seems better to me.

> occurs when the bug triage people try to do this task. If they go early,
> then some F9 bugs will stay rawhide and should not.

That seems almost impossible to me since, at this stage rawhide and F-9
are almost the same, bug-wise.

> It would be better for people to seriously take a breather and wait on
> reporting F10 bugs on that first repo build for F10... there will obviously
> be many bugs and it'd be simpler to start posting them a week after the
> release.

No, especially enhancements, packaging bugs. In any case these are the
kind of bugs that are filled against rawhide after the cvs branch moves.
They are likely to be targeted for rawhide, while usual bugs are likely
to be targeted for both rawhide and F-9, so it seems much better to me
to have them be kept in rawhide.

--
Pat

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-15-2008, 10:11 AM
Andrew Farris
 
Default rawhide bugs becoming F-9 bugs

Patrice Dumas wrote:

On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 08:37:23PM -0700, Andrew Farris wrote:
There were MANY duplicate bugs and some new bugs filed against rawhide
which are F9 bugs in the last week before release... doing that change


But aren't they rawhide bugs too?


Maybe, maybe not.


It is much better to have those bugs
opened against the latest version of fedora, having to go through
bugzilla just to say "hey, don't close my bug" as unfrequently as
possible seems better to me.


Sure that makes sense in the short term, but how/when do you change them? Thats
precisely the problem (not ever changing rawhide bugs to a release version)
which resulted in several year old bugs being open against 'rawhide' for code
that will never be touched again. Searching 'rawhide' bugs is much less useful
when its that cluttered... and thats very bad for testers trying not to report
duplicate bugs.


So the question is, if not NOW at release, then when should those open bugs be
changed to a release version? How much harder would it be to do later than it
is now?


--
Andrew Farris <lordmorgul@gmail.com> www.lordmorgul.net
gpg 0x8300BF29 fingerprint 071D FFE0 4CBC 13FC 7DEB 5BD5 5F89 8E1B 8300 BF29

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-15-2008, 01:35 PM
Chuck Anderson
 
Default rawhide bugs becoming F-9 bugs

On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 03:11:30AM -0700, Andrew Farris wrote:
> So the question is, if not NOW at release, then when should those open bugs
> be changed to a release version? How much harder would it be to do later
> than it is now?

If you are going to change rawhide bugs to Fx bugs at Fx release time,
why even have rawhide as a bugzilla version at all? Why not report
bugs in what will become F10 under version F10 now? You can tell from
the reported date that it was during the development cycle of F10.

If people can't be bothered to update a bug once every 6 months if it
still applies to the latest version, then it should be closed WONTFIX.
Leaving it as "rawhide" forever does no one any good.

So I propose to get rid of "rawhide" as a Bugzilla version, and create
the F10 version NOW, and likewise, create Fx Bugzilla versions at the
time Fx is branched in CVS.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-15-2008, 02:49 PM
Patrice Dumas
 
Default rawhide bugs becoming F-9 bugs

On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 03:11:30AM -0700, Andrew Farris wrote:
> Patrice Dumas wrote:
>> On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 08:37:23PM -0700, Andrew Farris wrote:
>>> There were MANY duplicate bugs and some new bugs filed against rawhide
>>> which are F9 bugs in the last week before release... doing that change
>>
>> But aren't they rawhide bugs too?
>
> Maybe, maybe not.
>
>> It is much better to have those bugs
>> opened against the latest version of fedora, having to go through
>> bugzilla just to say "hey, don't close my bug" as unfrequently as
>> possible seems better to me.
>
> Sure that makes sense in the short term, but how/when do you change them?
> Thats precisely the problem (not ever changing rawhide bugs to a release
> version) which resulted in several year old bugs being open against
> 'rawhide' for code that will never be touched again. Searching 'rawhide'
> bugs is much less useful when its that cluttered... and thats very bad for
> testers trying not to report duplicate bugs.

You are misunderstanding what I say, I am not against changing from
rawhide to a release, for the reason you state, that rawhide is a moving
target. But I think that it is better to make a mistake by filling a bug
against a more recent version than against an old version, because in
case of an old version, the packager will have to move his bug one more
time when the release becomes EOL. So to avoid having time lost in
changing releases it is better to make mistake in the direction of the
next release than in the direction of past releases, and I explained in
the remaining of my mail why it was much more likely that a bug filed in
the time of uncertainy between release and rawhide it is likely that
rawhide is right.

> So the question is, if not NOW at release, then when should those open bugs
> be changed to a release version? How much harder would it be to do later
> than it is now?

As I said before, I think that the right time is when a rawhide branch is
created in CVS, and not at release time.

--
Pat

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-15-2008, 03:06 PM
Jesse Keating
 
Default rawhide bugs becoming F-9 bugs

On Thu, 2008-05-15 at 16:49 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote:
>
> You are misunderstanding what I say, I am not against changing from
> rawhide to a release, for the reason you state, that rawhide is a moving
> target. But I think that it is better to make a mistake by filling a bug
> against a more recent version than against an old version, because in
> case of an old version, the packager will have to move his bug one more
> time when the release becomes EOL. So to avoid having time lost in
> changing releases it is better to make mistake in the direction of the
> next release than in the direction of past releases, and I explained in
> the remaining of my mail why it was much more likely that a bug filed in
> the time of uncertainy between release and rawhide it is likely that
> rawhide is right.

Perhaps what's missing then is a flag a maintainer can toss into a bug
that will exclude it from automated culling. That way you won't have to
"move" it again at any time, you just note to the triage team that you
are aware and working the bug by dropping something in the bug. Maybe a
flag, maybe a status whiteboard item, but something.

--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
--
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 01:01 AM.

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