[Mageia-dev] Backports process (addendum to policy)

[Samuel Verschelde]

Le jeudi 8 septembre 2011 21:16:50, Florian Hubold a écrit :
> Am 08.09.2011 13:08, schrieb Colin Guthrie:
> > 'Twas brillig, and Samuel Verschelde at 08/09/11 11:59 did gyre and 
gimble:
> >> (QA Team and Triage team in CC, but please answer only to
> >> mageia-dev at mageia.org)
> >> 
> >> I was asked to define a process for backports validation, so here is a
> >> proposal. We can discuss it a few days and then I'll add the result to
> >> the backports policy page.
> >> 
> >> Process for backports :
> >> 
> >> Triage:
> >> - identify backport requests
> >> - add "Backport Request: " in the bug report summary
> >> - add the "backport" keyword
> >> - assign to maintainer
> >> 
> >> The maintainer can refuse to do the backport :
> >> - doesn't want to maintain it =>  assign the bug report back to
> >> bugsquad at mageia.org so that another packager can step in
> >> - has a good reason for not providing this backport (policy, possible
> >> breakage...) =>  close as wontfix
> >> 
> >> Packager:
> >> - create bug report if not done already
> >> - submit to {core,nonfree,tainted}/backports_testing
> > 
> > Is this straight from the cauldron tree in subversion?
> > 
> >> - find a tester : original bug reporter when there is one, yourself if
> >> there's none, or ask in forums/irc/MLs...
> >> - once tested by at least one person (it must be said explicitly in the
> >> bug
> >> 
> >> report), hand it to QA :
> >>    - make sure the bug report summary starts with "Backport Request: "
> >>    or
> >> 
> >> "Backport Candidate:"
> >> 
> >>    - add the "backport" keyword if missing
> >>    - assign to qa-bugs at ml.mageia.org
> >>    - list the source RPMs if there are several
> >> 
> >> - be ready to fix bugs and answer QA team questions
> >> 
> >> QA:
> >> - test backports the same way that we test updates. But don't forget
> >> that updates have a higher priority than that of backports.
> >> - move the packages from backports_testing to backports
> > 
> > Just from a man power perspective this, could be a lot of work for QA
> > (even at lower priority) but I cannot see a way to improve this without
> > sacrificing quality control!
> 
> If the packager himself does basic testing and makes sure backport works,
> that would relieve QA from some work, no?

In my opinion this is what a packager should always do, be it for an update, a 
backport, or a package in cauldron. But this doesn't remove the need for a QA 
validation if we want to guarantee a minimal level of quality.

Samuel