Hi, On Thu, Oct 17, Michal Suchánek wrote:

On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 08:43:49PM +0200, Thorsten Kukuk wrote:

...

Hi,

please stop the Group Tag War on the back of the packagers!

Since one side escalated this to the board, I think the other side should escalate the same from the oppsite now. It's really a stupid idea to escalate something and then do something similar.

Especially that Jan Engelhardt is changing the packaging policy in the openSUSE wiki without anouncing it on the packagers mailing list and let them comment it for two weeks, but change the packages of other people immeaditly!

https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_guidelines_change_process I cannot find such a RFC on the packaging mailing list and I cannot find a two week long discussion. And it's only allowed to change the wiki if there are no strong objections, but as the discussion here shows, there are strong objections for all variants!

Discussion where?

I have seen discussion on opensuse-factory only.

Exactly, why is Jan changing the Guidelines after his will and modify packages of other people?

...

Let the package maintainers decide if they want the Group tags or not. If that concept would work, they will choose one. If there is no working concept, they will remove it. Quite simple.

Then please let the packagers do it rather than mass-removing Group tags in packages that had no changes for years while the discussion is still ongoing.

Please show me a single SR where I'm doing this! Thorsten -- Thorsten Kukuk, Distinguished Engineer, Senior Architect SLES & MicroOS SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nuernberg, Germany Managing Director: Felix Imendoerffer (HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On Thu, Oct 17, Michal Suchánek wrote:

On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 09:00:09PM +0200, Thorsten Kukuk wrote:

...

Hi,

On Thu, Oct 17, Michal Suchánek wrote:

...

On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 08:43:49PM +0200, Thorsten Kukuk wrote:

...

Hi,

please stop the Group Tag War on the back of the packagers!

Since one side escalated this to the board, I think the other side should escalate the same from the oppsite now. It's really a stupid idea to escalate something and then do something similar.

Especially that Jan Engelhardt is changing the packaging policy in the openSUSE wiki without anouncing it on the packagers mailing list and let them comment it for two weeks, but change the packages of other people immeaditly!

https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_guidelines_change_process I cannot find such a RFC on the packaging mailing list and I cannot find a two week long discussion. And it's only allowed to change the wiki if there are no strong objections, but as the discussion here shows, there are strong objections for all variants!

Discussion where?

I have seen discussion on opensuse-factory only.

Exactly, why is Jan changing the Guidelines after his will and modify packages of other people?

...

...

Let the package maintainers decide if they want the Group tags or not. If that concept would work, they will choose one. If there is no working concept, they will remove it. Quite simple.

Then please let the packagers do it rather than mass-removing Group tags in packages that had no changes for years while the discussion is still ongoing.

Please show me a single SR where I'm doing this!

Then please show me the SRs where I add Group tags (other than very old ones when rpmlint still complained about them).

I never wrote that you are doing it, but you wrote that I'm doing it. So there is nothing I have to prove, only you. Thorsten -- Thorsten Kukuk, Distinguished Engineer, Senior Architect SLES & MicroOS SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nuernberg, Germany Managing Director: Felix Imendoerffer (HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On Thursday 2019-10-17 21:20, Thorsten Kukuk wrote:

...

Cool, then you must reject all the group removals, because _that_ is not in the guideline either.

Please show me a single SR which I approved with group removals! Please stop sprying lies and FUD.

I did not claim that you _accepted_ any SR to that end. I have not spread lies or FUD. Else, show me. Until then, you just spread a lie that I supposedly spread a lie. So shut it. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On 10/18/19 5:52 AM, Stasiek Michalski wrote:

On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 9:10 PM, Jan Engelhardt wrote:

...

Oh look, the magic packaging comittee (now termed "packaging team") makes an apperance again, of course half of them are not involved in the day-to-day process anymore. I think you are looking at a page which is both outdated, and has not seen application in a long time.

Does that invalidate the supposed process? Maybe not. But apparently the pro-remove equipe took it as such. As I have shown you before, the tooling was changed, the wiki page was not. Then the tooling was changed again, the wiki page was not (kind of making it accurate again). Then the crusade started and... needless to say, the wiki page was not updated even if, for a very tiny moment, we assume that the group removal was somehow legitimzed.

So please, look around in your SUSE office before throwing glass stones.

Then maybe this should be a suggestion to a board, can we somehow resolve the issue with teams consisting of people that do not do what is claimed on the wiki, especially for teams where guidelines dictate much of the work of the project. This could be done by electing a representative of a team, which would be responsible for organizing meetings a few times a year to discuss changes to the process and guidelines, as well as validate the team membership.

Well currently we have a process and it generally works, that is if you want to change the guidelines etc you create a proposal post it on this list and work to a consensus of **developers** in this case from the initial proposal Mid last year, it seems that the people who created the proposal considered that the only developers that objected at the time were Jan and the package hub team who they worked with to find a solution. Given that in a project this bug there will probably always be objections they decided that rightly or wrongly just one agreement was good enough for a consensus. They obviously didn't update the wiki guidelines at the time because the change would have triggered breakages in multiple tools such as Yast and rpmlint. So now having fixed those tools they feel it is time to change the guidelines as per there initial discussions last year. So I can see there view and how they consider this to be reasonable although more people have objected in the last days then when they did there first proposal and started the work. We already have adequate checks and balances here, its the review team's job to ensure that packages meet the guidelines. If a member of the review team is rejecting changes that do meet with the guidelines as discussed on this list / packaging then that is a matter for the board, likewise if guidelines are changed without first having a discussion here or if two groups can not decide on what the guidelines should be. 98% of the time the above policy works so i'm not sure that there is a real need to change it. -- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B

On Fri, Oct 18, Dave Plater wrote:

The one thing I can't understand is what bad thing the Group: tag does to a package, why stop at removing Group:

The group tag per se isn't bad, the problem is that, even if some people disagree, the current concept does not really work because it's outdated and needs a heavy rework.

the Release: tag does nothing in openSUSE packages and is set automatically by obs.

This is not correct, while the Group Tag isn't used for installation or update of RPMs, but has pure informative character, release tags make sure that the right package version get's installed and that it get updated. Removing the release tag would break the fundamental parts of package management. Thorsten -- Thorsten Kukuk, Distinguished Engineer, Senior Architect SLES & MicroOS SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nuernberg, Germany Managing Director: Felix Imendoerffer (HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On 10/18/19 9:44 AM, Thorsten Kukuk wrote:

On Fri, Oct 18, Dave Plater wrote:

...

The one thing I can't understand is what bad thing the Group: tag does to a package, why stop at removing Group:

The group tag per se isn't bad, the problem is that, even if some people disagree, the current concept does not really work because it's outdated and needs a heavy rework.

That's not a good enough reason to remove it though Greetings, Stephan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On 10/18/19 9:48 AM, Stefan Seyfried wrote:

Am 18.10.19 um 09:44 schrieb Thorsten Kukuk:

...

This is not correct, while the Group Tag isn't used for installation or update of RPMs, but has pure informative character, release tags make sure that the right package version get's installed and that it get updated. Removing the release tag would break the fundamental parts of package management.

Then try to set it to a value and see what OBS does to it. So we could as well just leave it out in the spec, as it is handled by OBS anyway.

Technically the value in the spec file defines a minimum of what obs will take. It just happens to be 0 in most. Greetings, Stephan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On 18/10/2019 09:48, Stefan Seyfried wrote:

Am 18.10.19 um 09:44 schrieb Thorsten Kukuk:

...

This is not correct, while the Group Tag isn't used for installation or update of RPMs, but has pure informative character, release tags make sure that the right package version get's installed and that it get updated. Removing the release tag would break the fundamental parts of package management.

Then try to set it to a value and see what OBS does to it. So we could as well just leave it out in the spec, as it is handled by OBS anyway.

The main point is why spam submit requests to remove something in such a hurry. Dave -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On 10/18/19 6:04 PM, Dave Plater wrote:

On 17/10/2019 20:43, Thorsten Kukuk wrote:

...

Let the package maintainers decide if they want the Group tags or not. If that concept would work, they will choose one. If there is no working concept, they will remove it. Quite simple.

The one thing I can't understand is what bad thing the Group: tag does to a package, why stop at removing Group: the Release: tag does nothing in openSUSE packages and is set automatically by obs. I think of all the work I had to do to satisfy rpm-lint with the correct group and now it's just being deleted wholesale for no real reason.

Well there was consensus and a bit ago that it was so far out of date and while the categories might have made rpmlint happy but are completely inconsistent with each other (see Richard's email in another thread). Generally once a new major SLE / openSUSE Leap release is out and working people see it as a good time to clean packages up and in this case now that the tools have been update to accept the fact we no longer want groups its easy to slowly clean everything up just by getting spec cleaner to remove the field over time. I guess the difference between "Release" and "Group" is that all the other rpm based distro's have also decided to remove groups. -- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B