Adam Williamson wrote:
> Eh. I don't think it's a particularly bad hack at all. It's simple,
> labelled, we know what it does, and it's inherently limited (it'll
> never do anything outside of an upgrade to F31).
That's exactly what makes this such a bad hack in my eyes. It "fixes" one
particular instance of this general issue, one that was found during
upgrades from F30 to F31. It does not fix any other instances of the bug,
even ones that could appear in the future in upgrades from F29 updates or
F30 updates to F31 updates. It is also a short-term fix, because the exact
same issue with libgit2 will likely still happen on upgrades from F30 to
F32, and the workaround is explicitly not applied there.
To me this feels like "fixing" a function:
bool isPrime(int x) {
return false;
}
as follows:
bool isPrime(int x) {
if (x == 31) // fix Fedora 31 blocker: 31 is prime!
return true;
return false;
}
:-)
> And yeah, I don't see this as a very bad hack in terms of 'tech debt'
> at all. We've done a lot worse in the past!
Not only does it not fix the actual issue (so it leaves the debt to actually
fix it for the next release), it also adds a hardcoded workaround that will
become dead code very soon.
Yes, Fedora has used other ugly hacks to creatively "fix" blocker bugs in
the past, some of which then ended up as the status quo for several releases
(because nobody cares about the issue anymore once it is off the blocker bug
list, so the proper fix never gets implemented). That does not make it a
good idea.
Kevin Kofler
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
