diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005998.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005998.html | 165 |
1 files changed, 165 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005998.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005998.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..7e78d2eca --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-June/005998.html @@ -0,0 +1,165 @@ +<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> +<HTML> + <HEAD> + <TITLE> [Mageia-dev] Proposal of a backporting process + </TITLE> + <LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" > + <LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Proposal%20of%20a%20backporting%20process&In-Reply-To=%3CBANLkTimf_J9PdZXWoQiWXqO4f8w04HtFTw%40mail.gmail.com%3E"> + <META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow"> + <META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> + <LINK REL="Previous" HREF="005997.html"> + <LINK REL="Next" HREF="006010.html"> + </HEAD> + <BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"> + <H1>[Mageia-dev] Proposal of a backporting process</H1> + <B>Ahmad Samir</B> + <A HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Proposal%20of%20a%20backporting%20process&In-Reply-To=%3CBANLkTimf_J9PdZXWoQiWXqO4f8w04HtFTw%40mail.gmail.com%3E" + TITLE="[Mageia-dev] Proposal of a backporting process">ahmadsamir3891 at gmail.com + </A><BR> + <I>Fri Jun 24 21:39:51 CEST 2011</I> + <P><UL> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="005997.html">[Mageia-dev] Proposal of a backporting process +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="006010.html">[Mageia-dev] Proposal of a backporting process +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#5998">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#5998">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#5998">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#5998">[ author ]</a> + </LI> + </UL> + <HR> +<!--beginarticle--> +<PRE>On 24 June 2011 02:09, Michael Scherer <<A HREF="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-dev">misc at zarb.org</A>> wrote: +><i> Hi, +</I>><i> +</I>><i> as said in the thread of firefox 5, and in the meeting of packager +</I>><i> sooner this week, this is the first mail about backports ( on 3 ). +</I>><i> +</I>><i> So here is the proposal of a process, based on the feedback of people, +</I>><i> and the idea of some packagers ( mainly stormi ). +</I>><i> +</I>><i> +</I>><i> - Someone request a backport ( by bugzilla, by madb, by a email, by +</I>><i> taking a packager family in hostage, whatever ). I would prefer use +</I>><i> bugzilla but this may not be very user friendly, or too heavy. +</I>><i> +</I> +How would the packager get notified of backports requests via madb? + +Would you elaborate on how bugzilla is heavy for a backports request? + +><i> - a packager decide to do it. Based on the policy ( outlined in another +</I>><i> mail ), and maybe seeing with the maintainer first about that for non +</I>><i> trivial applications, the backport can be done, or not. The criterias +</I>><i> for being backported or not are not important to the process, just +</I>><i> assume that they exist for now ( and look at next mail ). So based on +</I>><i> criteria, someone say "it can be backported, so I do it". +</I>><i> +</I> +[...] + +><i> - I am not sure on this part, but basically, we have 2 choices : +</I>><i>  - the packager take the cauldron package and push to backport testing +</I>><i>  - the packager move the cauldron package in svn to backport, and there +</I>><i> send it to backport testing. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> Proposal 1 mean less work duplication, but proposal 2 let us do more +</I>><i> customization. +</I>><i> +</I> +Option 1 doesn't only mean not duplicating work, but also that the the +spec in backports svn isn't ever out-dated; the only reason I see a +package being in stable distro SVN is if it's in /release|updates, not +backports... + +><i> if the package doesn't build, the packager fix ( or drop the idea if +</I>><i> this requires too much work ) +</I>><i> +</I>><i> - the packager send requesting feedback about the backport from the +</I>><i> people who requested it, and test it as well. +</I>><i> +</I> +Probably off-topic, but how will that work with madb? i.e. how will +the maintainer get the feedback? + +><i> - based on feedback ( ie if the package work or if the packager is +</I>><i> confident ), the packager decide to move it to backport for everybody, +</I>><i> using some stuff similar to rpmctl ( the tool we used to move package at +</I>><i> Mandriva ). The tool would also send notifications. +</I>><i> +</I> +The packager decides to move it and he has the necessary privileges to +do so? or will he have to request someone from another team to move +it? + +><i> - if the package doesn't work, he either fix, or drop the backport idea. +</I>><i> If he fix, we go back on testing, if he drop, we remove the rpm ( with a +</I>><i> automated cleaning of rpm after 1 or 2 months ). +</I>><i> +</I> +[..] + +><i> If the packager drop the backport, it should be notified to the +</I>><i> requester ( hence the use of bugzilla, or a more suitable tool ) +</I>><i> +</I> +Agreed. + +><i> This way : +</I>><i> - packages are not sent untested, thus raising confidence in backports +</I> +How many times did backports breaks a user's whole installation? we +always say that backports should mainly be cherry picked, but not +enabled all the time... so how does installing a new version of e.g. +wine break the user's system when he can easily back out that rpm? + +><i> - the QA should not be overloaded, and can focus on updates +</I>><i> - sysadmins are not overloaded +</I>><i> - people requesting backport see how QA work, and are involved into the +</I>><i> distribution as testers, thus creating a much healthier discussion with +</I>><i> packagers, and creating more incentive to help. And since they request +</I>><i> the package, they will be motivated to test more than stuff they do not +</I>><i> use. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> WDYT ? +</I>><i> +</I>><i> -- +</I>><i> Michael Scherer +</I>><i> +</I>><i> +</I> + + +-- +Ahmad Samir +</PRE> + + + + + + + + +<!--endarticle--> + <HR> + <P><UL> + <!--threads--> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="005997.html">[Mageia-dev] Proposal of a backporting process +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="006010.html">[Mageia-dev] Proposal of a backporting process +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#5998">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#5998">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#5998">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#5998">[ author ]</a> + </LI> + </UL> + +<hr> +<a href="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-dev">More information about the Mageia-dev +mailing list</a><br> +</body></html> |