On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 08:30:32AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > An update has been submitted for systemd today: > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/kmod-18-4.fc21,systemd-216-9.fc21 > > with a fairly short description. I wanted to flag up that, in fact, > systemd-216-9 is a major change from systemd-216-8 and is not really > systemd 216 at all. Hi Adam, this annoucement misrepresents the situation quite a bit. Since you are speaking from your position as QA chief, your word carries a lot of weight. We *were* in contact on IRC yesterday, I'm in #fedora-devel semi-permanently, and it should not be a problem to show it to me before you sent it out, since you are talking about updates I made. If you disagreed with what I have to say and *then* sent the mail, that would be fine, but not like this, out of the blue. Anyway, returning to the matter at hand, systemd-216-9 is fairly close to systemd-216-8, has patches over it to fix *known bugs*, the ones listed in the update, a few listed on the freedesktop systemd bug tracker, and a few small ones I found while testing the update. The delta is not as small as I would like, but fits imho in the rules. If systemd upstream was doing point releases, this would certainly qualify as one. Actually it was 216-2 which contained the biggest change. I built it on Oct 7, before the alpha freeze. It was called "216" because 217 wasn't tagged yet, and I didn't want F21 to miss the bugfixes and features which have accumulated in the upstream git. So 216-2 has most of the post-216 commits, and 216-9 is fairly close to that. It *is* built from 217 by reverting the major changes done after 216-2, but that is a matter of convenience... It was simply simpler and more explicit this way (reverts not ommitted patches). > systemd-216-8 (and 216-1 through 216-5) and earlier) was more or less > identical to upstream systemd-stable 216: > http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/systemd-stable/log/?h=v216-stable . > systemd "216-9" is not built from 216 at all, it is in fact systemd-217 > with some particular changes (presumably intended to be the most > disruptive ones) reverted. When I dropped build-related files and > directories and documentation from the trees, did a context-free > recursive diff, and filtered out the metadata from the diff, it still > worked out at >7,000 lines worth of additions and removals between the > underlying code of 'systemd-216-8' and 'systemd-216-9'. This is a lot of > change to land between Beta and Final. Like I said on IRC yesterday, a large part of this is code which is not compiled for Fedora, or unsupported [*], or tests. > Testers, please take care to test the update thoroughly, despite the > small bump and small description it is a major change to the package. That I can agree with. I'd much prefer a concrete list of things to test in this update though, which would be *useful* and lead to a better release. Right now you suggest that anything might be broken. Zbyszek [*] systemd-resolved, systemd-networkd -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
