2On 16.6.2020 10:43, Peter Robinson wrote:
I'm not seeing any kernel 5.7.1, 5.7.2 kernel builds in koji and on it's
way to <=33 now after 5.7.1 had been released ( expected after 5.7.1,
there are two weeks since last 5.7.x build ) is that part of this new
workflow along with this significant CI noise and needless one line ack
Nothing at all related to it what so ever. The standard process for
new stable kernels in Fedora stable releases has been "sometime after
the .3 release" and has been that as long as I've been involved in
kernel stuff (about 10 years).
You might want to update [1] to reflect what is written since as I
recall for over a decade this has always been more or less the case ( or
atleast the aim ).
"For stable Fedora branches, the updates essentially follow the upstream
stable release schedule. Those tend to be released once a week or
slightly less frequently. We do the minor update, build and submit,
making sure that the N-1 update is in stable before pushing that release
(unless N-1 is very broken.) E.g. When 3.19.2 is released, we push it to
testing and make sure 3.19.1 is at least queued for stable. That way
bodhi doesn't obsolete the 3.19.1 update. When we have a major rebase
for a stable Fedora branch, we follow the same guidelines as above but
simply allow more time for people to test."
The process for stable lands the new kernel into the stabilization in
dist-git, and 5.7.2 has been there since Wed 10th, from there the
various maintainers check it's ready and then a test week is scheduled
and initial builds are done.
The process is unchanged by any of the changes for the rawhide kernel
building which has the new process. Justin is on PTO this week, later
this week upstream will no doubt do a 5.7.3 release and I suspect next
week there will be a test day.
Who's his backup ( please tell me he has a backup ) and what's she/he doing?
messages on what was otherwise a mailinglist in which people could have
meaningful discussions ( as of today 41 messages of pure noise until you
reach Justin Forbes "Re: Streamlining the ARK config process" )?
As one of the community kernel maintainers doing a bunch of the arm
related kernel stuff in my own time I am actually just fine with the
the messages, the increase in actively is larger than the very quiet
kernel list before but it's still completely manageable and with
headers etc the messages are very easily filtered if you don't like
them.
Where do you draw the line what is manageable and what is not 5 mails
per day 10,100?
So you are suggesting people workaround the problem by now adding filter
rules to circumvent this noise instead of it simply be directed to a
separated ML in which people could simply subscribe to if it wished for
CI noise?
Did not the RH management that conducted this takeover of the Fedora
kernel process even consider creating a separated mailinglist (
kernel-ci, kernel-build whatever ) when it started projecting it's
internal spaghetti mess of process,workflows and cluttered pipelines
onto the community?
Well as far as I'm aware "RH management" had nothing to do with the
change of process and it came directly from the actual kernel
maintainers both in Fedora and Red Hat. It will in the medium term
allow the wider community have a say and more of an impact as to what
RHEL kernels look like and opens up the process more, with my
community maintainer hat on (and I really have zero to do with the
internal RHEL kernel process) I actively welcome this.
Red Hat should be listening to and serving it's customers and adhere to
it's customers needs not Fedora so I dont see how the wider community (
whatever that means presumably the Fedora community ) wants to have any
saying in anything RHEL related kernel or otherwise nor would I expect
RH to allow the Fedora community dictate and decide it's business
strategy and what actually gets pushed by RH no more than it has done in
the past so could you explain to me what benefits the *Fedora* ( not
RHEL not CentOS not whatever else ) community is supposed gain from this
since I fail to see what those benefits are supposed to be.
JBG
1. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Kernel#Schedule
_______________________________________________
kernel mailing list -- kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
