Am Freitag, den 28.12.2007, 15:25 -0400 schrieb Xavier Lamien: > > > 2007/12/28, Christoph Wickert <christoph.wickert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > Raleigh, we have a problem... > > python-gammu, which is required by wammu, prevents users from > updating > to the latest gammu release for several days now. It has > already been > reported in Bugzilla, see > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426848 and - even > more > interesting - > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=425831 > > > I fallen on an broken deps on kernel-xen-devel during the update of my > F-8 release, why don't talk about too ? Because I never was affected by this one and did not even hear of it before. IMHO a devel package is not that important as an application. Most users could simply remove the package without loosing functionality, this is different with wammu. BTW: Are you talking about an upgrade from F7 to F8 or about an update during the release? > Its not the first time we have this kind of trouble. Yes, and this is the reason why I wrote my mail. We NEED to look for ways that this CANNOT happen, because it really is a showstopper that frightens people to use Fedora. At least I have heard people complaining about this over and over again, for example at fedoraforum.de > > I Agree this should not happen but, ask first why there is a broken > deps on some packages and why this happen. I guess most of the time it happens because of a lack of communication and coordination. But if all packages are owned by the same person this reason IMO is not valid. > > This leads me to some questions: > > 1. Why is # 425831 still in status "New"? It has been > reported on Dec 16th and the maintainer already responded to > it. > 2. What's so difficult to coordinate 2 (3 with wammu) > dependent packages? All are owned by the same packager. IMO > this should be done in one single update in bodhi. > > It's not difficult, it's not my first update of gammu > collection/dependence package, and it's not the first time a upadte > depended release. Then you should have known what happens... ;) Once again: I'm not here to blame someone. > > 3. Do we need better training for our maintainers or > more > documentation in the wiki? The broken deps already > appeared in EPEL before they were in F8, so the maintainer > should have known that he's breaking something when he did the > gammu update in Fedora. > > I think we should set up and automate or web_api to request repo tag > for package we wanted to build against fresh released one > to build other into koji/mock from repo I agree that the current situation is not optimal for the packagers because the required packages have to be added to buildroot manually by rel-eng. But AFAIK we do have the possibility of chain-builds now. > > 4. When was the testing done? gammu-1.17.0-1.fc8 was > built on Dec. 22 11:22:28 MST [1] and hit the updates repo on > Dec. 23 22:50:08 [2]. This is less than 36 hours for testing. > > For that, we could make a bodhi policy. Cause no rules say all package > Must go to testing-update before move to stable one. You are right. I thought we already had policy for that but the wiki says: "If you feel that community testing is unnecessary for your update, you can choose to push it straight to the stable fedora-updates repository instead." IMO this is wrong, it should only be allowed for security updates. > > 5. Why has gammu been pushed directly to updates and not > to > updates-testing? According to the changelog it was not > a > security update. > > Why does only security update should go to stable ? Because problems like this case most likely would have been realized in testing before they annoy a large number of users. Pushing updates directly to stable renders updates-testing useless. > > Note that I don't want to blame a single person here. I think > this is just an example that we really NEED to think about how > to avoid such situations in the future? I know there are > people on vacation these days, but there are enough people > that offered help. Unfortunately they are not allowed to by > the ACLs. > > I'm not here to blame anyone too but this thread should up many time > ago. on differente pacakge that broken yum udpate in the past, not > only this one. Let's not talk about the past, let's talk about how to avoid this in the future. There are several ways we could try to accomplish this: Some are more strict policies, others are more technical, but most important I think we should get rid of the "don't touch other peoples packages"-attitude. If someone fixed that within one or two days I wouldn't have written my previous mail. Christoph > > > > Any thoughts? > Christoph > > [1] http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=28966 > [2] > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F8/FEDORA-2007-4743 > -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
