On Fri, 2018-10-12 at 17:33 +0200, Martin Kolman wrote: > On Fri, 2018-10-12 at 16:04 +0200, Kalev Lember wrote: > > On 10/12/2018 03:51 PM, Rex Dieter wrote: > > > Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 9:39 AM Rex Dieter <rdieter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > I've 2 bodhi updates that were submitted for batched/stable prior to the > > > > > freeze, will these get pushed prior to release? I'd hoped so. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Freeze was entered at 2018-10-09 00:00 UTC. > > > > > > Ok, that's much earlier than I thought. Thanks for the clarification. > > > > The start of the freeze is a long standing confusion. This is something > > where we could do much better. Could FESCo change the release schedule > > so that instead of saying that a freeze starts on Tuesday at 00:00, > > change it to say Monday at 23:59? That would be so much clearer and > > remove all ambiguity. > Another issue is the all the delays any state changes introduce in the bodhi updates > (push to updates, push to stable, etc.). Coupled with the updates being locked > during the pushes and being repushed & all karma lost if any package is added or changed, > I would say it is often almost impossible to actually get an updated to stable during the > non-freeze periods. This is clearly an exaggeration, as in practice we get hundreds of updates landing during the non-freeze periods. > This is even more augmented for installer related updates that unlike say Firefox fewer people > are likely to be even able to test. Also it's still not possible for maintainers with disjoint > commit rights to submit a shared updated without having to go bother a proven packager to do it for them. This is really your problem, and it doesn't have a lot to do with delays or anything like that, it's just that testing installer updates is hard, period. I'm working on an openQA test to try and mitigate this, but it's blocked by a weird lorax bug that I keep not having time to investigate because other stuff gets set on fire (by all those 'stable' updates that you think aren't happening :>) > In the end it more and more looks like it is better to get all changes and non-critical bug fixes in > via Rawhide and only bother with branched updates for critical blocking issues, rather than trying to fix as > many issues as possible before GA. If you have an installer update that you want to get out during a non- freeze period, just poke us (QA) and ask. We will take the time to build an image and test it. If you don't poke us, we may not, because I don't have an alert set for anaconda updates showing up, or anything like that - we may not even notice it. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
