On 23 December 2010 01:43, Samuel Verschelde <[email protected]> wrote: > > In fact I think Frederic was talking about several versions of the same > package, not necessarily several versions of the distribution. However, I > don't think we can or should ask people to write down every package version > which has the bug. > > We can guess many things automatically, provided the information is of good > quality (the RPM/SRPM field always has a complete filename in it, and all > affected versions of the distribution are flagged, whatever the way used for > that : multivalue field when it'll be possible, whiteboard meanwhile...). > > For those who don't wan't to read everything, example 1 may be enough, I'm > just trying to cover several cases, not that every case brings something > really important to the discussion. My point in those examples is that we can > provide useful information regarding bugs on packages in software managers or > mageia-app-db, but that depends on the information present in the bug > reports, that's what I'd like this to be taken into account in bug handling > processes. > > > -- Example 1 : bug in stable release (core/release) + cauldron -- > > foo-3.4-1mga2011.0.src.rpm has a bug in Mageia 2011.0 (stable release, the > package is in core/release), and the bug is also present in cauldron. We know > it is in 2011.0/core/release because we have the exact SRPM name and affected > distribution versions in the bug report. > > 1) 2011.0/core/release contains foo-3.4-1mga2011.0.src.rpm > 2) 2011.0/core/updates contains foo-3.4-2mga2011.0.src.rpm > 3) 2011.0/core/updates_testing contains foo-3.4-3mga2011.0.src.rpm > 4) 2011.0/core/backports contains foo-3.5-1mga2011.0.src.rpm > 5) 2011.0/core/backports_testing contains foo-3.5-2mga2011.0.src.rpm > 6) cauldron contains foo-3.5-1mga2011.1.src.rpm > > Now suppose we are in mageia-app-db, on each of those SRPMs' page (or on the > RPMs pages that have those SRPMs as source RPMs). What can we tell regarding > the bug we are talking about ? > > 1) bug is present, this is the exact version that has the bug > 2) bug is present, because the bug report is still open > 3) we can't tell, that's a testing package. We can at least say : "the > current version in core/updates has the following bugs, maybe this testing > package fixes them ? Please consult the following bug reports and test" > 4) trickier. I would try the following guess : bug is still open in cauldron, > so it's probably present in the backport too. However if the bug is fixed in > cauldron we can say nothing more than : "the version in updates has the bug, > cauldron hasn't, maybe the backport also hasn't the bug?". > 5) same as 4) > 6) easy : if cauldron is still mentioned in the bug report (as the version or > on the whiteboard), then the bug is still valid. If there was a separate bug > report which is closed, then the bug is fixed. > > Of course I assume we don't close a bug as fixed on a stable distribution > version if there was no update to fix the bug (update, not backport). > > > -- Example 2 : bug in stable release (core/updates) + cauldron -- > > foo-3.4-2mga2011.0.src.rpm has a bug in Mageia 2011.0 (stable release, the > package is in core/release), and the bug is also present in cauldron. > > Same as example 1, except that we cannot tell if the bug is present in case > 1) : 2011/core/release > - either it wasn't and was introduced in an update > - or it was already there > > What we would do in mageia-app-db is tell "an update for this RPM has a the > following bug, it may or may not be also present in this package". However in > this case few people are still interested in the package in core/release (we > may even hide those packages by default when there's an update and keep them > only for advanced users). > > > -- Example 3 : bug in stable release (core/updates_testing) -- > > foo-3.4-3mga2011.0.src.rpm has a bug in Mageia 2011.0 (stable release, the > package is in core/updates_testing). > > 1) we can't say much, so we'll not show this bug report > 2) we can't say much, so we'll not show this bug report > 3) that's the package which has the bug > 4) not concerned > 5) not concerned > 6) not concerned > > You could say "Hey, this example shows nothing useful", and at first I > thought the same, but in fact because we know the exact version of package > which has the bug (thanks to the RPM/SRPM field + distribution version field) > we know we won't bother users about this bug if they consult 1), 2), 4), 5) > or 6). > > > -- Example 4 : bug in stable release (core/backports) -- > > foo-3.5-1mga2011.0.src.rpm has a bug in Mageia 2011.0 (stable release, the > package is in core/backports). > > 1) we can't say much, so we'll not show this bug report > 2) we can't say much, so we'll not show this bug report > 3) we can't say much, so we'll not show this bug report > 4) that's the package which has the bug > 5) we can't tell, that's a testing package. We can at least say : "the > current version in core/backports has the following bugs, maybe this testing > package fixes them ? Please consult the following bug reports and test" > 6) we can't tell, but it's interesting to mention that the package in 4) has > the bug, they may be related > > > > Regards > > Samuel Verschelde >
This thread is about bugzilla configuration and setup not mageia-app-db... -- Ahmad Samir
