[Mageia-dev] new mgarepo version

Sun Jul 17 05:40:21 CEST 2011

Michael Scherer a écrit :
+>
+> Le samedi 16 juillet 2011 à 14:31 +0300, Ahmad Samir a écrit :
+>> On 16 July 2011 03:02, Michael Scherer<misc at zarb.org>  wrote:
+>>> Le mercredi 13 juillet 2011 à 12:11 +0200, nicolas vigier a écrit :
+>>>> On Wed, 13 Jul 2011, Samuel Verschelde wrote:
+>>>>
+>>>>> Le mercredi 13 juillet 2011 00:30:41, nicolas vigier a écrit :
+>>>>>> Hello.
+>>>>>>
+>>>>>> mgarepo version 1.9.11 adds maintdb command :
+>>>>>>
+>>>>>> $ mgarepo maintdb --help
+>>>>>> Usage:
+>>>>>>      Take maintainership of one package :
+>>>>>>         mgarepo maintdb set [package] [login]
+>>>>>>
+>>>>>>      Remove yourself from maintainer of a package :
+>>>>>>         mgarepo maintdb set [package] nobody
+>>>>>>
+>>>>>>      See who is maintainer of a package :
+>>>>>>         mgarepo maintdb get [package]
+>>>>>>
+>>>>>>      See the list of all packages with their maintainer :
+>>>>>>         mgarepo maintdb get
+>>>>>
+>>>>> I used in in Mageia 1 using the package in updates_testing and it works well.
+>>>>
+>>>> Ok, it's moved to updates now.
+>>>
+>>> Wasn't it against the policy ( ie, this is neither a bugfix, this is a
+>>> version update, providing feature ) ?
+>>>
+>>
+>> That is a bug fix; is there any other way a Mageia packager running
+>> mga1 can set/unset himself as a maintainer of a package in the
+>> official Mageia repos?
+>
+> Yes :
+> - using cauldron in a vm, a chroot
+> - backporting by himself the package
+>
+> Packagers convenience do not seems a reason to bypass our policies.
+>
+>> That is not a "feature", that's a "basic requirement" in repository
+>> access and management tool for a distro, that was missing and is now
+>> available, that warrants an official update, IMHO...
+>
+> Everybody has a different vision of what is a basic requirement, and the
+> problem with such reasoning is that we first start to say "this is not a
+> new feature", and then, someone say "I need to have this in stable and
+> like $FOO, I think that's a basic requirement, so we should
+> backport/upgrade".
+
++1
+I think it's better to follow policy as much as possible.  And try to avoid a 
+lot of ad hoc exceptions.  If we come to a concensus on an exception, that 
+would effectively revise our policy.  But it is better to revise policy first.
+
+A new feature, however essential it may seem, is still a new feature.
+And nothing is wrong with using the occasional backport for specific reasons.
+
+Although I installed the mgarepo update, I would have looked for it in 
+backports if it hadn't been in updates.
+
+> All packagers should have a cauldron installed somewhere, or that mean
+> they cannot test any packages or try to reproduce any bugs on it ( ie,
+> do the job of a package maintainer ).
+
+Good point.  Have to do that soon.  That should be documented for apprentices. 
+  (If not already.)
+
+> And so if they do not have, I do not think we should encourage them to
+> do so.
+
+-- 
+André
+