Hello guys, I just wanted to announce that the service is already deployed and that I am trying to figure out all the quirks and ask you to please be patient. But you were faster :-) Thank you for the reports, please ping me with anything more that you find. I am also trying to monitor what is happening. The issue that Miro found https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2133080#c19 was caused by an URL-encoded caret symbol in the package name, which is IMHO a Copr bug. I already sent a PR https://github.com/fedora-copr/copr/pull/2454 The issue that Frank found https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2119983 I am not sure, looks like a temporary unavailability of the URL because when I resubmitted the package, it built successfully. Not sure what should be done about this, I will probably wait if this happens again. Jakub On Thu, Jan 5, 2023 at 1:45 AM Frank Crawford <frank@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, 2023-01-04 at 23:41 +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 02. 12. 22 18:20, Jakub Kadlcik wrote: > > > Hello folks, > > > > > > for a couple of years now, I've been interested in the Fedora > > > package > > > review process. Our queue is in hundreds of waiting packages for as > > > long as I can remember. I believe the situation can be improved. > > > > > > Since summer, I did ~40 package reviews to get a better grasp of > > > the > > > situation and realized what I want to do. > > > > > > I started working on a service [2] that listens to fedora-messaging > > > and for every new RHBZ review ticket or a new comment with updated > > > packages, it submits a build in Copr. Thanks to this [1] feature, > > > Copr > > > automatically runs the fedora-review tool and generates the > > > review.txt file. Once the build is finished, my service gets the > > > message and generates a helpful comment (so far only to STDOUT). > > > > > > **Unless there is general disapproval, I am planning to let it post > > > the comments to Bugzilla.** > > > > > > So far the benefit is limited but, it still can immediately tell > > > the > > > contributor that their package is broken and fails to build, and > > > also > > > saves a reviewer the time of running the fedora-review tool > > > manually. However, I also implemented support for the fedora-review > > > tool to generate a JSON output next to the standard review.txt. The > > > PR > > > is still pending [2], please review it if you can. Once this is > > > released, I can parse its contents and generate much helpful > > > comments > > > for the contributors. > > > > > > The end goal is to let contributors go back and forth against the > > > CI > > > to fix the most obvious mistakes and then let the reviewers take > > > only the final look. > > > > > > Hopefully, it will be a better experience for everyone. > > > > > > > > > [1] http://frostyx.cz/posts/running-fedora-review-after-copr-build > > > [2] https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service > > > [3] https://pagure.io/FedoraReview/pull-request/463 > > > > Jakub, could this service be misbehaving? > > > > See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2133080#c19 > > We also saw the same sort of thing yesterday on an update to a review > request: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2119983 > > > > -- > > Miro Hrončok > > Regards > Frank > _______________________________________________ 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 Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
