Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

Dne 6.3.2018 v 21:36 Kevin Kofler napsal(a): > Nicolas Mailhot wrote: >> The “never go backwards” policy means that as soon something hits devel >> other packages can rely on your package and start adapting >> their packages on the basis of your changes. You can not pull the carpet >> from under

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

Dne 6.3.2018 v 19:26 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a): > On 03/06/2018 07:47 AM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 02:58:45PM +, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > ...snip... >>> But that has its own issues. >> Sorry, just to be clear, what would have its own issues: >> - asking rawhide

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

On 03/06/2018 03:37 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > But bumping Epoch, as the policy makes you do in such a case, does > absolutely nothing to fix that. So I don't see how the current policy helps. True, but the epoch thing also offers a bit more encouragement to fix the package without forcing a

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 04:47:49PM +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > Sorry, just to be clear, what would have its own issues: > - asking rawhide users to use distro-sync instead of update? > - automatically have dnf detect it's running in rawhide and default to > distro-sync instead of update?

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

On Tue, 2018-03-06 at 21:30 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > Do note that distro-sync can downgrade packages, but can't handle > > all > > the cases. ie, upgrade postgresql and update all your data you > > can't > > just downgrade the rpm and be fine. Or any number of other > >

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 12:56:56PM -0500, Randy Barlow wrote: > On 03/03/2018 01:34 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > That is due to the "Rawhide can never go backwards" policy, which I still > > do > > not understand the point of, especially in the light of "distro-sync" > > having > > been

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

On Fri, 2018-03-02 at 04:40 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > > I disagree entirely with the above. I think the solution is to gate > > packages coming into rawhide and hold or reject those that break the > > compose until they are fixed. I think being proactive is VASTLY better > > than being

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

Randy Barlow wrote: > On 03/03/2018 01:34 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: >> That is due to the "Rawhide can never go backwards" policy, which I still >> do not understand the point of, especially in the light of "distro-sync" >> having been supported by both the old yum and the new dnf for years. > >

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > The “never go backwards” policy means that as soon something hits devel > other packages can rely on your package and start adapting > their packages on the basis of your changes. You can not pull the carpet > from under their feet just because you changed your mind. This

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

Kevin Fenzi wrote: > Do note that distro-sync can downgrade packages, but can't handle all > the cases. ie, upgrade postgresql and update all your data you can't > just downgrade the rpm and be fine. Or any number of other scriptlets > that do things that cannot easily be reversed. The Epoch hack

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

On 03/06/2018 07:47 AM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 02:58:45PM +, Stephen Gallagher wrote: ...snip... >> But that has its own issues. > > Sorry, just to be clear, what would have its own issues: > - asking rawhide users to use distro-sync instead of update? > -

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

On 03/03/2018 01:34 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > That is due to the "Rawhide can never go backwards" policy, which I still do > not understand the point of, especially in the light of "distro-sync" having > been supported by both the old yum and the new dnf for years. Sometimes an updated package

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

Le mardi 06 mars 2018 à 15:53 +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon a écrit : > On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 03:33:44PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Mar 03, 2018 at 07:35:00PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > > > So please let us just repeal that "Rawhide can never go >

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 02:58:45PM +, Stephen Gallagher wrote: >On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 9:54 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon >wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 03:33:44PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Mar 03,

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 9:54 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 03:33:44PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Mar 03, 2018 at 07:35:00PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > >> So please let us just repeal that "Rawhide

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 03:33:44PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > On Sat, Mar 03, 2018 at 07:35:00PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > >> So please let us just repeal that "Rawhide can never go backwards" > >> policy. > > > > This is actually a fair point, but I wonder

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > On Sat, Mar 03, 2018 at 07:35:00PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: >> So please let us just repeal that "Rawhide can never go backwards" >> policy. > > This is actually a fair point, but I wonder what prevents us from doing it > today. Technically, nothing. This is purely

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

On Sat, Mar 03, 2018 at 07:35:00PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > with using Epoch's much more commonly. > > That is due to the "Rawhide can never go backwards" policy, which I still do > not understand the point of, especially in the light of "distro-sync" having > been

Re: Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

On 03/02/2018 04:04 AM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Also, how would you handle obsolete forgotten stray packages that linger > in the repo (because they've not been killed properly, or a tool bug > resulted in their non removal)? Gating gives any such package the power > to block all updates in more

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

On Sat, Mar 03, 2018 at 07:35:00PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > * It means things will likely be broken longer as there is less urgency > > to fix them quickly. > This means less stress for maintainers who are usually not working full time > on Fedora. Which, let's not forget, is the *vast*

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

Kevin Fenzi wrote: > * It means things will likely be broken longer as there is less urgency > to fix them quickly. This means less stress for maintainers who are usually not working full time on Fedora. I don't see why a broken dependency in some leaf application that happens to be included

Re: Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

On 03/02/2018 08:42 AM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Le vendredi 02 mars 2018 à 10:52 +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon a écrit : ...snip... >> That'd actually give us the opportunity to clean up more our repos no? >> :) > > Explain that to someone who had several hours/days of builds rejected > because of

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

On 03/01/2018 07:40 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > And how do you propose doing that? The only reliable way to hold packages > that break the compose would be to actually try to run the whole compose > process after every package build. That just does not scale. The composes > are only daily for a

Re: Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

Le vendredi 02 mars 2018 à 10:52 +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon a écrit : > On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 10:04:35AM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > Le jeudi 01 mars 2018 à 12:42 -0800, Kevin Fenzi a écrit : > > > > > > I disagree entirely with the above. I think the solution is to > > > gate > > >

Re: Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 10:04:35AM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Le jeudi 01 mars 2018 à 12:42 -0800, Kevin Fenzi a écrit : > > > > I disagree entirely with the above. I think the solution is to gate > > packages coming into rawhide and hold or reject those that break the > > compose until they

Re: Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

Le jeudi 01 mars 2018 à 12:42 -0800, Kevin Fenzi a écrit : > > I disagree entirely with the above. I think the solution is to gate > packages coming into rawhide and hold or reject those that break the > compose until they are fixed. While I don't disagree with the sentiment there needs to be a

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 04:40:03AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Kevin Fenzi wrote: > >> Something needs to be done to make the compose process more robust, e.g.: > >> * running createrepo on a stable release, so that we do not have to be > >> able > >> to init a chroot of the target system to

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

Kevin Fenzi wrote: >> Something needs to be done to make the compose process more robust, e.g.: >> * running createrepo on a stable release, so that we do not have to be >> able >> to init a chroot of the target system to compose a repository. A broken >> dependency, even in systemd or rpm,

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

On 02/28/2018 06:19 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Fabio Valentini wrote: >> AFAICT, those "broken deps in rawhide" mails are only sent if there is a >> compose, and during the past weeks, there have been few of those ... so >> breakage is sometimes allowed to sit unnoticed (and grow increasingly >>

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

Dusty Mabe wrote: > FYI: atomic ostree composes are not release blocking so that is not why a > compose will fail. In the past we had composes failing due to something Atomic failing to compose, I guess that changed since. Kevin Kofler ___

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

On 03/01/2018 11:52 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Vít Ondruch wrote: >> Speaking of that, it seems that the Rawhide compose failed yesterday due >> to some KDE/QT soname bump: > [actually a typo in a Requires, as was already pointed out] >> >>

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

Vít Ondruch wrote: > Speaking of that, it seems that the Rawhide compose failed yesterday due > to some KDE/QT soname bump: [actually a typo in a Requires, as was already pointed out] > > https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/rawhide/Fedora-Rawhide-20180228.n.0/logs/global/pungi.global.log >

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

Dne 1.3.2018 v 14:47 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a): > Vít Ondruch wrote on 03/01/2018 06:44 PM: >> >> >> Dne 1.3.2018 v 03:19 Kevin Kofler napsal(a): >>> Fabio Valentini wrote: AFAICT, those "broken deps in rawhide" mails are only sent if there is a compose, and during the past weeks,

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

Vít Ondruch wrote on 03/01/2018 06:44 PM: Dne 1.3.2018 v 03:19 Kevin Kofler napsal(a): Fabio Valentini wrote: AFAICT, those "broken deps in rawhide" mails are only sent if there is a compose, and during the past weeks, there have been few of those ... so breakage is sometimes allowed to sit

Re: Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes

Dne 1.3.2018 v 03:19 Kevin Kofler napsal(a): > Fabio Valentini wrote: >> AFAICT, those "broken deps in rawhide" mails are only sent if there is a >> compose, and during the past weeks, there have been few of those ... so >> breakage is sometimes allowed to sit unnoticed (and grow increasingly >>

Frequently broken Rawhide/Branched composes (was: Re: Unannounced soname bump (Rawhide): qpdf (libqpdf.so.18 -> libqpdf.so.21))

Fabio Valentini wrote: > AFAICT, those "broken deps in rawhide" mails are only sent if there is a > compose, and during the past weeks, there have been few of those ... so > breakage is sometimes allowed to sit unnoticed (and grow increasingly > worse) for very long. Isn't that the real issue to