On 03/08/2018 10:00 AM, Randy Barlow wrote: > Greetings fellow Fedorans! > > I would like to kick off a general discussion about how we might gate > packages in Rawhide. I think it would be nice to get something in place > for the Fedora 29 timeframe. I was hoping we could come up with a more detailed proposal for the community at the upcoming Infrastructure hackfest, but sure we could start the discussion now. > As one of the Bodhi contributors, I am inclined to suggest that we could > use Bodhi on Rawhide, similar to how we use it for our stable/branched > releases, with more relaxed rules (perhaps 1 day in testing or something > simple). I don't think a testing will be of help here. Who would run with it enabled? I'm much prefer we just use the gating to run automated tests and get the update out as quickly as we can after that. > > It may be possible to automate the process a bit to make it less heavy > for developers, though there is some complication for multi-package > updates (more on that in a bit). For simple package updates, we may be > able to detect new commits on dist-git, and react to those by > automatically starting a Koji build, and automatically filing a Bodhi > update when that build is complete. I think that would be pretty nice, > and pingou created a PoC[0] to do this about a year ago. This has nice appeal for simple standalone updates... > Multi-package updates won't be so easy though. It's not uncommon for us > to need to update packages together, and the above workflow would be > problematic since it would result in updates with single packages in > them rather than updates with multiple packages. Of course, buildroot > overrides would be a problem too, since multi-package updates often > depend on each other at build time too. > > We could create some way for packagers to indicate that a commit (or > possibly even a whole repo) is not intended to be "autobuilt/updated". > If the packager indicates this then their builds would go into a > rawhide-pending (similar to what we do for f27 today). Once they have > all their builds (and buildroot overrides) the way they want them, they > can create the update. having to file overrides would be a pretty big drag for people like the KDE/Gnome teams... but I suppose they do it somehow in stable updates now. > Another idea that was tossed around in some chats I had with people > about this involved a system for packagers to use to create Koji side > tags. Bodhi manages BuildRoot Overrides today (with expirations), so > perhaps Bodhi could be expanded to also manage Koji side tags (also with > expirations). I can't remember all the details about this approach or > why it was suggested over the former approach, but I wanted to list it > to invite others to chew on it and see if it could work. This approach has the advantage of not needing buildroot overrides, you just build all the things into the side tag in whatever order needed. The downside is that these would take koji cycles to keep doing newrepos for. I was org not in favor of using bodhi, but it was noted that this is the one place we have now for test results and gating, so I kind of think we do need to use it now. That allows us to reuse it and waverdb, etc. I really don't want to slow rawhide down or put barriers in place for maintainers, so I think we need to make things as painless as we can. kevin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
