Dne 02. 03. 19 v 8:09 Adam Williamson napsal(a): > On Fri, 2019-03-01 at 16:19 -0500, Ben Cotton wrote: >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GatingRawhideSinglePackageUpdates >> >> == Summary == >> We want to gate packages on test results before they can land in >> rawhide. This will reduce the amount of broken dependency, >> uninstallable packages and broken composes leading to a more stable >> rawhide as well as less work on the infrastructure and rel-eng teams >> to keep composes working. >> >> This project will be split in two phases, at first only single package >> updates will be supported, in a second stage, we will add support for >> multi-packages updates. >> >> This proposal is about the phase 1 of this project. >> >> == Owner == >> * Name: [[User:pingou|Pierre-Yves Chibon]] >> * Email: pingou - pingoured.fr >> >> People who are/will be involved in this: >> * Coordinator: [[User:pingou|Pierre-Yves Chibon]] >> * Bodhi: [[User:bowlofeggs|Randy Barlow]] and [[User:abompard|Aurélien >> Bompard]] >> * Fedora CI: [[User:dperpeet|Dominik Perpeet]] > It might be a good idea to have a QA contact here, in case people > choose to block on tests maintained by the QA team (Taskotron or openQA > tests). > >> == Detailed Description == >> >> Querying the Bodhi database, it was revealed that 95% of all our >> updates involve a single package. >> >> To be exhaustive, here are the exact number found by Randy: >> >> Of all time: >> >> Single build updates: 123,657 (94.1%) >> Multi build updates: 7,766 ( 5.9%) >> >> Total: 131,423 >> >> Per release: >> >> Fedora 29: >> >> Single: 4,675 (93.7%) >> Multi: 316 ( 6.3%) >> >> Fedora 28: >> >> Single: 9,153 (94.5%) >> Multi: 536 ( 5.5%) >> >> EPEL 7: >> >> Single: 12,664 (94.0%) >> Multi: 814 ( 6.0%) > I'd suggest the implication that single-package updates are "the norm" > is slightly problematic, for two reasons: > > 1) Rawhide is very different from stable releases, and even from > Branched. Major changes like API breaks are not meant to be sent to > stable releases at all, by policy. So I don't think you can necessarily > rely very strongly on data regarding updates in Branched and stable > releases to draw conclusions about the likely nature of changes in > Rawhide. > > 2) This does not consider the not uncommon case that updates *should > have been* multi-package updates, but they were done wrong.
These were my first thoughts as well. Also, how are the mass rebuilds envisioned? I can't imagine that Ruby rebuild will be held from entering rawhide due to some broken dependency. Not sure how you want distinguish the package, which is typically "single" from "multi" package. Vít _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
