On Mon, 2024-12-16 at 08:25 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2024-12-16 at 10:17 +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > Looking at our guidance > > > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Provenpackager_policy/ > > > > It is very non-specific > > > > "Prior to making changes, provenpackagers should try to communicate > > with owners of a package in bugzilla, dist-git pull requests, IRC, > > matrix, or email." > > > > This is sooo vague & open to interpretation I can easily see how differences > > of opinion can arise from this. If you send an email, how long do you have > > to wait for a response ? If you don't get an email response do you have to > > open a bugzilla too, or is lack of email response enough to allow you to go > > ahead ? If 1 communication attempt is not sufficient, is two different > > attempts sufficient, or do they have to try all 5 methods of communication > > listed ? Combine that with "personal preferences" and it is surprising there > > are not more conflicts seen. > > It's also difficult to really always honor. As a PP I certainly touch > packages without checking in first, sometimes, when it's necessary e.g. > to fix Rawhide compose or a problem that's causing tests to fail for > all updates, or something. In fact, let me confess - just this weekend, I built seven packages without sending PRs or contacting the maintainers. Why? Well, libphonenumber 8.13.50 inadvertently changed symbols without bumping the library soname, so we had to rebuild all its deps. Then 8.13.52 reverted the change, so we were back to the original symbols...but since 8.13.50 had hit Rawhide and we'd rebuilt everything for it, now we had to rebuild everything *again*. I co-ordinated this with the libphonenumber maintainer. He built 8.13.52 on a side tag, I rebuilt all the deps on the same side tag, he submitted an update. Yes, I *could* have contacted the maintainers of all seven deps and said "hey, I'm going to do a no-change rebuild of your package so it goes back to having the libphonenumber symbols it had before", and waited a week for all of them to reply, or not. I *could* have sent pointless PRs for all seven packages - pointless because for the ones that use rpmautospec they'd have contained nothing but an empty commit, for the others they'd have contained a release bump and a changelog entry, and for all of them the CI would not have built against the side tag anyway. But I didn't, because honestly it seemed silly and I don't want to have all that pointless process hanging over my week/weekend. So I just did the bumps and built the packages, Sergio submitted the update, and everything is apparently fine. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-376cb0546e This kind of thing does go on, whatever the letter of the PP policy says. I don't think it's really causing any problems, and I'm not sure things would be *better* if I had been somehow forced to send out mails/PRs about this. Maybe if there was a *better* PR-based workflow where the library PR and the dep PRs somehow all went together or were one PR, that would be good? But since there isn't... -- Adam Williamson (he/him/his) Fedora QA Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @adamw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://www.happyassassin.net -- _______________________________________________ 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
