On 4/4/2012 2:24 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 02:09:07PM +0200, Fabio M. Di Nitto wrote: >> On 4/4/2012 1:36 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >>> On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 12:23:17PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: >>>> On Wed, 04 Apr 2012 09:23:16 +0200, FMDN (Fabio) wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> with one of the latest updates of corosync, we had to break some >>>>> API/ABI. All packages have been rebuilt and they are waiting for updates >>>>> to be available. >>>>> >>>>> I also re-built sheepdog >>>>> (http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=310076) >>>>> >>>>> but i don´t have super powers to push the update into F17 and I have >>>>> been unable to get in touch with current sheepdog maintainer (in CC). >>>>> >>>>> Can somebody help please? I have no interest in sheepdog myself, but i >>>>> also don´t like to leave transitions unfinished. >>>> >>>> Hard to help there, because you've created an update ticket already >>>> >>>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-4877 >>>> >>>> missing just the sheepdog build. If you unpushed it, any provenpackager >>>> could create a new ticket containing all packages. Editing other's tickets >>>> needs special privileges (probably limited to bodhi admins). >>>> >>>> Also, voting +1 on your own updates is being frowned upon. Even more so, >>>> if the stable karma threshold is just 1. We assume the update submitter >>>> is happy with the submitted builds, so that it doesn't need an explicit >>>> vote. >>> >>> Indeed, what is the rationale for bohdi even allowing people to +1 their >>> own updates. Seems like it should be blocked, surely ? >> >> Truth told, in our team(s), we use this "loophole" to save people time >> in "paperwork". >> >> I can only speak for myself, but when we do updates of several packages >> at once, we _always_ coordinate/agree/pretest and all, way before the >> new stuff hits Fedora. >> >> While i understand the point of karma, i see very little use of going >> around asking people to login/find the update/votes, etc. when can all >> be coordinate and driven by one person. >> >> Then again, I am not here to start another thread. I would simply like >> to get a working version of sheepdog in F17 or somebody to retire the >> package if nobody uses it anymore. > > Given > that we're at F17 Beta, an ABI breaking change should not have been > scheduled for push to stable while you knew the Sheepdog issue was > not resolved. IMHO this is an abuse of the update process. Also forgot to mention that all updates are still in updates-testing exactly because of Beta. They are not being pushed to -updates. So the API/ABI change is simply sitting there waiting. Fabio -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
