Hi all, I've just upgraded my main workstation form F-20 to rawhide, and during the distro-sync I noticed that several packages in rawhide are older then in F-20. Although there will be some exceptions I believe that for most of them this is caused by some packages still not having a proper workflow where they commit all fixes / upgrades to rawhide first and then merge them into older branches as appropriate. This often leads to some fixes being in the F-20 branch and some in the devel branch, and neither having the complete set of fixes ... I've filed bugs for all of the pkgs I've encountered with this issue: 1063257 - accountsservice in rawhide is older then in F-20 1063258 - ecore in rawhide is older then in F-20 1063259 - gnome-disk-utils in rawhide is older then in F-20 1063260 - gnome-initial-setup in rawhide is older then in F-20 1063261 - iscsi-initiator-utils in rawhide is older then in F-20 1063262 - libgdata in rawhide is older then in F-20 1063263 - network-manager-applet in rawhide is older then in F-20 1063264 - netpbm in rawhide is older then in F-20 1063266 - planner in rawhide is older then in F-20 1063267 - python-apsw in rawhide is older then in F-20 1063270 - usb_modeswitch-data in rawhide is older then in F-20 Note that the bug description is written in an attempt to educate the packager. So 2 questions: 1) What can we do to educate packagers more about this ? 2) Can someone maybe write a script which automatically detects this situation and files bugs with a description text aimed at not only getting the issue fixed, but also educating the packager? This script should then be run on say a weekly basis, so that ie build-issues hindering a build in rawhide don't cause daily false-positive spam. Regards, Hans -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
