[opensuse-buildservice] Re: [opensuse-project] How should we inform packagers about new upstream versions?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Christian Morales Vega wrote:
Sometimes do you find packages in the OBS that are outdated. You never know why, perhaps the packager doesn't knows about the new upstream version and perhaps he knows but is just busy. Up to now when I found such a case I reported it like an "Enhancement" bug in bugzilla. But some packagers think bugzilla isn't the correct place for such a thing.
If the packager doesn't knows about the new version he can leave the package outdated for a long time. So would be good that, at some time, if an user finds the problem he reports it. But, how should be reported? There is any feature planned in the OBS to help with this? What other distros do?
A very good point.
Personally, I think Bugzilla is the best place to report it.
It also makes it much easier to track the status.
The problem is finding the relation package->packager, to know whom to
assign the Enhancement request.
IIRC there's the option for packagers to include bugzilla information in
their OBS projects and packages now -- I haven't looked at it yet, so I
can't say much more about it. But it should really be made easily
available to end-users.
IMO the easiest option would be to use the %PACKAGER tag in the rpm
files for that ("rpm -q --qf '%{PACKAGER}\n' foobar" or "rpm -qi
foobar"), but it would require adding that feature to the OBS (or
rather, to build).
Would be better discussed on opensuse-buildservice@opensuse.org though,
which is why I'm CC'ing this email there (please followup on that list).
cheers
- --
-o) Pascal Bleser
On Wednesday 27 February 2008 20:43:05 wrote Pascal Bleser:
Christian Morales Vega wrote:
Sometimes do you find packages in the OBS that are outdated. You never know why, perhaps the packager doesn't knows about the new upstream version and perhaps he knows but is just busy. Up to now when I found such a case I reported it like an "Enhancement" bug in bugzilla. But some packagers think bugzilla isn't the correct place for such a thing.
If the packager doesn't knows about the new version he can leave the package outdated for a long time. So would be good that, at some time, if an user finds the problem he reports it. But, how should be reported? There is any feature planned in the OBS to help with this? What other distros do?
A very good point.
Personally, I think Bugzilla is the best place to report it. It also makes it much easier to track the status.
The problem is finding the relation package->packager, to know whom to assign the Enhancement request. IIRC there's the option for packagers to include bugzilla information in their OBS projects and packages now -- I haven't looked at it yet, so I can't say much more about it. But it should really be made easily available to end-users.
yes, there is. You can define a "bugowner" role in the project or package. A link to bugzilla will be shown in build.o.o afterwards.
IMO the easiest option would be to use the %PACKAGER tag in the rpm files for that ("rpm -q --qf '%{PACKAGER}\n' foobar" or "rpm -qi foobar"), but it would require adding that feature to the OBS (or rather, to build).
The problem with that was that people tend to mail the packagers directly instead of using bugzilla. So, I personally fear that reports get duplicated and not tracked in bugzilla anymore .. bye adrian -- Adrian Schroeter SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) email: adrian@suse.de --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008, Adrian Schröter wrote:
IMO the easiest option would be to use the %PACKAGER tag in the rpm files for that ("rpm -q --qf '%{PACKAGER}\n' foobar" or "rpm -qi foobar"), but it would require adding that feature to the OBS (or rather, to build).
The problem with that was that people tend to mail the packagers directly instead of using bugzilla. So, I personally fear that reports get duplicated and not tracked in bugzilla anymore ..
You see this from you companies point of view, where bugzilla entries are a good thing. From my point of "community user" it is not (at least for minor topics like package upgrades). Why? a) I have about 5 different bugzilla/bugtracker/xxx accounts (very likely much more, but these are the important ones). Each of these has slightly different usage, semantics, passwords, ... b) When I get a mail it needs less than 5 minutes to answer it (for such easy topics). For bugtracking bug reports I need the 5 minutes at least to find login page, to find login data, to login, ... c) For the reporter it is the same: 1) Creating an account, as usually anonymous reports are not allowed. 2) Finding the correct topic/target (can take several minutes). 3) Entering the report, verify, send. Usually the will stop before point 1. And all these efforts only for "Your package is not up-to-date. Version xxx has been released 3 weeks ago". Better would be a button "package should be updated" on the download/search pages and a "status flag" in the and an email from the buildservice to the maintainers. The maintainers can then decide, if a bug-entry in the bug-tracker is useful or if the update is done fast and without bug tracking. Ciao -- http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available)
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 09:53:03 +0100 (CET)
Dirk Stoecker
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008, Adrian Schröter wrote:
IMO the easiest option would be to use the %PACKAGER tag in the rpm files for that ("rpm -q --qf '%{PACKAGER}\n' foobar" or "rpm -qi foobar"), but it would require adding that feature to the OBS (or rather, to build).
The problem with that was that people tend to mail the packagers directly instead of using bugzilla. So, I personally fear that reports get duplicated and not tracked in bugzilla anymore ..
You see this from you companies point of view, where bugzilla entries are a good thing. From my point of "community user" it is not (at least for minor topics like package upgrades).
Agreed!
Why?
a) I have about 5 different bugzilla/bugtracker/xxx accounts (very likely much more, but these are the important ones). Each of these has slightly different usage, semantics, passwords, ...
b) When I get a mail it needs less than 5 minutes to answer it (for such easy topics). For bugtracking bug reports I need the 5 minutes at least to find login page, to find login data, to login, ...
yep.
c) For the reporter it is the same: 1) Creating an account, as usually anonymous reports are not allowed. 2) Finding the correct topic/target (can take several minutes). 3) Entering the report, verify, send. Usually the will stop before point 1.
And all these efforts only for "Your package is not up-to-date. Version xxx has been released 3 weeks ago".
And: How often are packages seriously out of date? I would guess, that those who register at build.o.o are personally interested in exactly those packages they chose to work on. Again, that's the position of a non-professional user, a simple community member. If such a packager loses interest, the work can easily be continued by someone who notices missing upstream integration. And the one who lost interest in a package is unlikely to follow a bugtracker anyway. May be it's different if it's "just a job" to follow a zillion packages. But for the hobbyists a bugtracker for notifying of new upstream releases seems useless.
Better would be a button "package should be updated" on the download/search pages and a "status flag" in the and an email from the buildservice to the maintainers.
That would be ok and enough. Detlef
The maintainers can then decide, if a bug-entry in the bug-tracker is useful or if the update is done fast and without bug tracking.
Ciao -- http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available)
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 09:53:03AM +0100, Dirk Stoecker wrote:
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008, Adrian Schröter wrote:
IMO the easiest option would be to use the %PACKAGER tag in the rpm files for that ("rpm -q --qf '%{PACKAGER}\n' foobar" or "rpm -qi foobar"), but it would require adding that feature to the OBS (or rather, to build).
The problem with that was that people tend to mail the packagers directly instead of using bugzilla. So, I personally fear that reports get duplicated and not tracked in bugzilla anymore ..
You see this from you companies point of view, where bugzilla entries are a good thing. From my point of "community user" it is not (at least for minor topics like package upgrades). Why?
I agree 100% with Dirk!
a) I have about 5 different bugzilla/bugtracker/xxx accounts (very likely much more, but these are the important ones). Each of these has slightly different usage, semantics, passwords, ...
b) When I get a mail it needs less than 5 minutes to answer it (for such easy topics). For bugtracking bug reports I need the 5 minutes at least to find login page, to find login data, to login, ...
c) For the reporter it is the same: 1) Creating an account, as usually anonymous reports are not allowed. 2) Finding the correct topic/target (can take several minutes). 3) Entering the report, verify, send. Usually the will stop before point 1.
And all these efforts only for "Your package is not up-to-date. Version xxx has been released 3 weeks ago".
Better would be a button "package should be updated" on the download/search pages and a "status flag" in the and an email from the buildservice to the maintainers.
The maintainers can then decide, if a bug-entry in the bug-tracker is useful or if the update is done fast and without bug tracking.
Ciao -- http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available)
Peter -- "WARNING: This bug is visible to non-employees. Please be respectful!" SUSE LINUX Products GmbH Research & Development
participants (5)
-
Adrian Schröter -
Detlef Steuer -
Dirk Stoecker -
Dr. Peter Poeml -
Pascal Bleser