Re: Bodhi 0.7.5 release

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, 2010-07-01 at 01:26 -0400, Luke Macken wrote:
> On 07/01/2010 12:47 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Jesse Keating wrote:
> >> There is a slight wrinkle in that right now, the bodhi code will
> >> automatically request a push of an item that reaches this karma threshold,
> >> and I don't believe there is a way yet to force it to wait for even
> >> greater amounts of karma.  I believe that fine grained tuning of karma
> >> automation is planned for the next major version (and rewrite) of bodhi.
> >
> > That's not a "slight wrinkle", that's a fatal showstopper which means this
> > change should never have hit production. I consider it completely
> > unacceptable for my updates to get promoted to stable when I didn't request
> > it (e.g. I disable karma automatism for all my updates).
> 
> If you disable karma automatism for your updates, they will not 
> automatically get promoted to stable upon critpath approval.

It would probably be good to advertise this more prominently somewhere.
I must admit I wasn't aware we still had this wrinkle - I assumed you'd
be getting it fixed this time around - and we should definitely alert
maintainers to it.

> > The way the workflow should work (*) is that:
> > * case 1: The maintainer requests the push to stable before the promotion is
> > approved. Then it will get withheld until approval. Once approval is
> > obtained, the push is automatically requested by Bodhi.
> 
> This is the workflow that occurs by default.
> 
> All critpath updates go to testing first, even if the maintainer chooses 
> stable.  It's tested and approved, then bodhi automatically promotes it 
> to stable.
> 
> > * case 2: The approval happens before a push to stable is requested. In that
> > case, the update is marked as approved and the maintainer can queue it to
> > stable at any time.
> > That's the only sane way to handle such approval, everything else is just
> > plain broken. (And isn't that how the security team approval works now? Why
> > is the proventester approval implemented differently?)
> 
> This is the workflow that occurs when you disable karma automatism.

Perhaps it would surprise people less if we made case 2 default for
critpath?
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux