1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
|
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE> [Mageia-dev] RFC: Opening Backports (once again...)
</TITLE>
<LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" >
<LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20RFC%3A%20Opening%20Backports%20%28once%20again...%29&In-Reply-To=%3C4EE38434.7040606%40mageia.org%3E">
<META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow">
<META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<LINK REL="Previous" HREF="010314.html">
<LINK REL="Next" HREF="010350.html">
</HEAD>
<BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff">
<H1>[Mageia-dev] RFC: Opening Backports (once again...)</H1>
<B>Thomas Backlund</B>
<A HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20RFC%3A%20Opening%20Backports%20%28once%20again...%29&In-Reply-To=%3C4EE38434.7040606%40mageia.org%3E"
TITLE="[Mageia-dev] RFC: Opening Backports (once again...)">tmb at mageia.org
</A><BR>
<I>Sat Dec 10 17:09:24 CET 2011</I>
<P><UL>
<LI>Previous message: <A HREF="010314.html">[Mageia-dev] RFC: Opening Backports (once again...)
</A></li>
<LI>Next message: <A HREF="010350.html">[Mageia-dev] RFC: Opening Backports (once again...)
</A></li>
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
<a href="date.html#10328">[ date ]</a>
<a href="thread.html#10328">[ thread ]</a>
<a href="subject.html#10328">[ subject ]</a>
<a href="author.html#10328">[ author ]</a>
</LI>
</UL>
<HR>
<!--beginarticle-->
<PRE>Michael Scherer skrev 10.12.2011 13:32:
><i> Le mardi 06 décembre 2011 à 00:56 +0200, Thomas Backlund a écrit :
</I>>><i> Now,
</I>>><i>
</I>>><i> here comes the question about backports once again.
</I>>><i>
</I>>><i> We are now 6+ months into Mageia 1, and we are nowhere closer to opening
</I>>><i> backports that we were at Mageia 1 release time.
</I>>><i>
</I>>><i> Because of that there are 3rdparty repos popping up everywhere...,
</I>>><i> something we hoped to avoid atleast partly when starting this project.
</I>><i>
</I>><i> Well, the backport issue ( ie :
</I>><i> - no garantee of keep the distribution upgradable
</I>
Policy is to always keep Cauldron with atleast higher release,
so next release will be ok.
I guess when we have 2 releases we must extend the policy to
state that if you backport to Mageia 1 you also must backport
to Mageia 2 in order to keep upgrading fully possible.
><i> - no security )
</I>
Well, that's the same as with current stable relase,
maintainer/backporter submits security fixes to backports_testing
QA validates, update gets pushed.
><i>
</I>><i> have also not been fixed, so that's rather unfair to
</I>><i>
</I>>><i> And at current rate we will probably release Mageia "infinity"
</I>>><i> before backports is opened.
</I>>><i>
</I>>><i>
</I>>><i> It has been delayed because of needed infrastructure changes,
</I>>><i> something no-one have had time to do so far...
</I>>><i>
</I>>><i> I know there is "only some coding missing" and "someone should
</I>>><i> do it", buth truthfully there are only a few that knows the
</I>>><i> code used in the buildsystem enough to actually make it happend,
</I>>><i> and they are already othervise busy or overloaded...
</I>>><i> (this is no rant against them, as all here are using their
</I>>><i> personal free time to help out)
</I>>><i>
</I>>><i> And to be honest I dont see that changing anytime soon...
</I>><i>
</I>><i> Then we have a bigger problem to solve.
</I>><i>
</I>
Yep, no argument here....
>><i> So here is a suggestion to get some value to our endusers:
</I>>><i>
</I>>><i> we add a backports branch on svn
</I>>><i>
</I>>><i> So packages for backports would use:
</I>>><i>
</I>>><i> svn.mageia.org/packages/backports/1/<package>/{current,pristine,releases}
</I>>><i>
</I>>><i> and allow that to be used for backports.
</I>>><i>
</I>>><i> Using a separate branch is also a cleaner way of providing
</I>>><i> backports, and makes it easy to separate changes needed only
</I>>><i> for Cauldron (or backports).
</I>><i>
</I>><i> Then in practice, that mean having a 2nd/3rd distribution ( because
</I>><i> there is a separate 2nd svn branch, and a 3rd one for later ) and so
</I>><i> that's a big no for me. Having 2+ branchs is just asking for trouble
</I>><i> when they are not in sync ( and since keeping everything in sync
</I>><i> properly with svn is a pain if there is a divergence, this will not be
</I>><i> done ).
</I>><i>
</I>><i> Worst, if we do like in mdv and propose 2 way of backporting ( submit
</I>><i> from cauldron, submit from a branch ), this will create a mess of having
</I>><i> some packages from cauldron, some from the branch, and people having no
</I>><i> way from knowing where does a package come from. This also make the
</I>><i> system harder to maintain and to follow, and rather impossible to script
</I>><i> properly.
</I>><i>
</I>><i> So that's also to be avoided.
</I>><i>
</I>
Well, branching is needed, regardless if it's done in a whole separate
branch as I suggested, or in a branch per package when needed.
><i> Having a separate branch where people can write also remove the only
</I>><i> incentive I have seen for backports, ie, wider testing of our packages,
</I>><i> because they may not really the same as in cauldron.
</I>><i>
</I>
It cant always be the same in cauldron and backports.
><i>
</I>><i> So here is what I propose :
</I>><i>
</I>><i> - have X branchs, but do not let anyone commit on it, besides a system
</I>><i> user. When a package is submitted to cauldron, it is also copied to this
</I>><i> branch, ie, we make sure current is in sync. The same goes for version
</I>><i> N-1 being copied from N once a backported rpm have been submitted to be
</I>><i> used by people. Once a distribution is no longer supported, we close the
</I>><i> branch, and disable the sync.
</I>><i>
</I>
If you cant commit to the branch, it's useless.
><i> - backports are only submitted from the branch, with separate
</I>><i> markrelease, tags, whatever. This let us have proper audit of backports,
</I>><i> and who did what.
</I>><i>
</I>
the same auditing is available in any branch or cauldron.
><i> - packagers still need to commit and submit on cauldron before any
</I>><i> backports. So we miss no fixes or anything by mistake. We also make sure
</I>><i> that cauldron is always the highest version possible, thus permitting at
</I>><i> least some form of upgrade. ( either stable to stable, provided
</I>><i> backports are used, or stable to cauldron ). And we also ensure that
</I>><i> backports are done first on the most recent stable version, for the same
</I>><i> reason ( ensure some form of upgrade path, as asked several time by
</I>><i> users ).
</I>><i>
</I>
Sorry, buth this wont work in reality...
Consider this:
version X in Mageia 1
version X+1 in Cauldron
version X+1 gets backported.
version X+2 uploaded in Cauldron
version X+2 cant be backported (depends on updated libs/packages in
Cauldron, and we dont backport libs that can break working setups)
version X+1 in backports need to be fixed (security/maintenance fix)
(here your logic breaks down, there is no place to fix it)
And since we aim for quality backports, the maintainer may want to
stay with version X+1 in backports even if X+2 could be backported
if maintainer think X+2 isn't a good candidate for some reason.
--
Thomas
</PRE>
<!--endarticle-->
<HR>
<P><UL>
<!--threads-->
<LI>Previous message: <A HREF="010314.html">[Mageia-dev] RFC: Opening Backports (once again...)
</A></li>
<LI>Next message: <A HREF="010350.html">[Mageia-dev] RFC: Opening Backports (once again...)
</A></li>
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
<a href="date.html#10328">[ date ]</a>
<a href="thread.html#10328">[ thread ]</a>
<a href="subject.html#10328">[ subject ]</a>
<a href="author.html#10328">[ 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>
|
