Re: gnome-boxes downgrade in F-19
On Fri, 2013-10-11 at 04:42 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: Jerry James wrote: On Aug 13, update FEDORA-2013-14530 acquired enough karma to be autopushed to stable. It went stable on Aug 15. The first update, FEDORA-2013-14567, stayed in limbo for awhile until positive karma was given to it on Sep 28 and 29, causing it to reach its karma threshold on Sep 29, and be autopushed to stable. On Sep 30, it went stable, wiping out the -2 build. The real issue there is autokarma. I have complained several times about how broken that concept is. If the decision to push to stable had been made by a sentient being, chances are this would not have happened. A sentient being made a decision to use autokarma. Maintainers can choose not to. The 'real issue' is clearly, as the previous posters stated, a bug in Bodhi. There are probably several; I suspect there's a different problem in the case where there's one update with multiple packages and then someone submits a newer update containing a newer build of only *one* of those packages. I don't think Bodhi does anything that could be considered 'the right thing' there either. Given the complexity of this case, I do think it would be a good idea to have a backstop 'sanity check' in Bodhi which would never allow a superseded update to be pushed stable without an explicit manual override. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin DOT net http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: gnome-boxes downgrade in F-19
Jerry James wrote: On Aug 13, update FEDORA-2013-14530 acquired enough karma to be autopushed to stable. It went stable on Aug 15. The first update, FEDORA-2013-14567, stayed in limbo for awhile until positive karma was given to it on Sep 28 and 29, causing it to reach its karma threshold on Sep 29, and be autopushed to stable. On Sep 30, it went stable, wiping out the -2 build. The real issue there is autokarma. I have complained several times about how broken that concept is. If the decision to push to stable had been made by a sentient being, chances are this would not have happened. Kevin Kofler -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: gnome-boxes downgrade in F-19
On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 10:38 PM, M A Young m.a.yo...@durham.ac.uk wrote: On Tue, 8 Oct 2013, Dan Williams wrote: On Tue, 2013-10-08 at 08:42 -0600, Jerry James wrote: Do you remember when I ranted about lack of communication between provenpackagers and the maintainers of the packages they touch [1]? Here is another case of lack of communication between people touching the same package. On Aug 8, Zeeshan Ali built gnome-boxes-3.8.4-1.fc19 and submitted update FEDORA-2013-14567. On Aug 9, Christophe Fergeau built gnome-boxes-3.8.4-2.fc19. Instead of editing the existing update, Christophe chose to create a competing update, FEDORA-2013-14530. Seems like there's something wrong with Bodhi here, because every time I create an update when there's already an older update pending, Bodhi obsoletes the old one and adds all the bugs from the old one to the new update. Even if somebody else filed the older update and I'm creating the new one. AFAIK, normal procedure is that you *don't* edit the old update at all, but each package NVR should get a new Bodhi update (so Christophe was correct in creating a new competing one) but that Bodhi takes care of obsoleting the old one. I have had this sort of thing happening to me a few times. From what I remember, Bodhi doesn't seems to obsolete packages that are in the pending state for updates-testing, so if you submit a new build within a day or so of the previous one (for example if a security update comes out just after another build) then bodhi may not obsolete the older build automatically. This sounds broken ... have you filed a bodhi ticket? -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: gnome-boxes downgrade in F-19
Hi, On 10/09/2013 01:08 PM, drago01 wrote: On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 10:38 PM, M A Young m.a.yo...@durham.ac.uk wrote: On Tue, 8 Oct 2013, Dan Williams wrote: On Tue, 2013-10-08 at 08:42 -0600, Jerry James wrote: Do you remember when I ranted about lack of communication between provenpackagers and the maintainers of the packages they touch [1]? Here is another case of lack of communication between people touching the same package. On Aug 8, Zeeshan Ali built gnome-boxes-3.8.4-1.fc19 and submitted update FEDORA-2013-14567. On Aug 9, Christophe Fergeau built gnome-boxes-3.8.4-2.fc19. Instead of editing the existing update, Christophe chose to create a competing update, FEDORA-2013-14530. Seems like there's something wrong with Bodhi here, because every time I create an update when there's already an older update pending, Bodhi obsoletes the old one and adds all the bugs from the old one to the new update. Even if somebody else filed the older update and I'm creating the new one. AFAIK, normal procedure is that you *don't* edit the old update at all, but each package NVR should get a new Bodhi update (so Christophe was correct in creating a new competing one) but that Bodhi takes care of obsoleting the old one. I have had this sort of thing happening to me a few times. From what I remember, Bodhi doesn't seems to obsolete packages that are in the pending state for updates-testing, so if you submit a new build within a day or so of the previous one (for example if a security update comes out just after another build) then bodhi may not obsolete the older build automatically. This sounds broken ... have you filed a bodhi ticket? +1 I've been bitten by this too, and I too consider this a bodhi bug and would like to see it fixed. Regards, Hans -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: gnome-boxes downgrade in F-19
Let's see how many bugs are existed now: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/bugs/bodhi -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
gnome-boxes downgrade in F-19
Do you remember when I ranted about lack of communication between provenpackagers and the maintainers of the packages they touch [1]? Here is another case of lack of communication between people touching the same package. On Aug 8, Zeeshan Ali built gnome-boxes-3.8.4-1.fc19 and submitted update FEDORA-2013-14567. On Aug 9, Christophe Fergeau built gnome-boxes-3.8.4-2.fc19. Instead of editing the existing update, Christophe chose to create a competing update, FEDORA-2013-14530. On Aug 13, update FEDORA-2013-14530 acquired enough karma to be autopushed to stable. It went stable on Aug 15. The first update, FEDORA-2013-14567, stayed in limbo for awhile until positive karma was given to it on Sep 28 and 29, causing it to reach its karma threshold on Sep 29, and be autopushed to stable. On Sep 30, it went stable, wiping out the -2 build. Is there any way we can change the update system to detect competing updates like this? The update system should have refused to create the second update, and required Christophe to either (1) edit the existing update, or (2) get the existing update canceled first, then submit the new one. Footnotes: [1] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2013-May/182432.html -- Jerry James http://www.jamezone.org/ -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: gnome-boxes downgrade in F-19
On Tue, 2013-10-08 at 08:42 -0600, Jerry James wrote: Do you remember when I ranted about lack of communication between provenpackagers and the maintainers of the packages they touch [1]? Here is another case of lack of communication between people touching the same package. On Aug 8, Zeeshan Ali built gnome-boxes-3.8.4-1.fc19 and submitted update FEDORA-2013-14567. On Aug 9, Christophe Fergeau built gnome-boxes-3.8.4-2.fc19. Instead of editing the existing update, Christophe chose to create a competing update, FEDORA-2013-14530. Seems like there's something wrong with Bodhi here, because every time I create an update when there's already an older update pending, Bodhi obsoletes the old one and adds all the bugs from the old one to the new update. Even if somebody else filed the older update and I'm creating the new one. AFAIK, normal procedure is that you *don't* edit the old update at all, but each package NVR should get a new Bodhi update (so Christophe was correct in creating a new competing one) but that Bodhi takes care of obsoleting the old one. Dan On Aug 13, update FEDORA-2013-14530 acquired enough karma to be autopushed to stable. It went stable on Aug 15. The first update, FEDORA-2013-14567, stayed in limbo for awhile until positive karma was given to it on Sep 28 and 29, causing it to reach its karma threshold on Sep 29, and be autopushed to stable. On Sep 30, it went stable, wiping out the -2 build. Is there any way we can change the update system to detect competing updates like this? The update system should have refused to create the second update, and required Christophe to either (1) edit the existing update, or (2) get the existing update canceled first, then submit the new one. Footnotes: [1] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2013-May/182432.html -- Jerry James http://www.jamezone.org/ -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: gnome-boxes downgrade in F-19
On Tue, 8 Oct 2013, Dan Williams wrote: On Tue, 2013-10-08 at 08:42 -0600, Jerry James wrote: Do you remember when I ranted about lack of communication between provenpackagers and the maintainers of the packages they touch [1]? Here is another case of lack of communication between people touching the same package. On Aug 8, Zeeshan Ali built gnome-boxes-3.8.4-1.fc19 and submitted update FEDORA-2013-14567. On Aug 9, Christophe Fergeau built gnome-boxes-3.8.4-2.fc19. Instead of editing the existing update, Christophe chose to create a competing update, FEDORA-2013-14530. Seems like there's something wrong with Bodhi here, because every time I create an update when there's already an older update pending, Bodhi obsoletes the old one and adds all the bugs from the old one to the new update. Even if somebody else filed the older update and I'm creating the new one. AFAIK, normal procedure is that you *don't* edit the old update at all, but each package NVR should get a new Bodhi update (so Christophe was correct in creating a new competing one) but that Bodhi takes care of obsoleting the old one. I have had this sort of thing happening to me a few times. From what I remember, Bodhi doesn't seems to obsolete packages that are in the pending state for updates-testing, so if you submit a new build within a day or so of the previous one (for example if a security update comes out just after another build) then bodhi may not obsolete the older build automatically. Michael Young -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
