[opensuse-buildservice] Re: [opensuse-project] How should we inform packagers about new upstreamversions?
Le mercredi 27 février 2008 à 20:15 +0100, Pascal Bleser a écrit :
-----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Sometimes do you find packages in the OBS that are outdated.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If the packager doesn't knows about the new version he can leave the package outdated for a long time.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.
I think another approach would make sense: users could report it on software.opensuse.org since that's where they look for software. Then we just need a way to mail the relevant packagers about this "new upstream" report. Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org
Vincent Untz <vuntz@novell.com> wrote:
Personally, I think Bugzilla is the best place to report it. It also makes it much easier to track the status.
I think another approach would make sense: users could report it on software.opensuse.org since that's where they look for software.
Then we just need a way to mail the relevant packagers about this "new upstream" report.
+1 Good example: http://www.archlinux.org/packages/ http://www.archlinux.org/packages/flaghelp/ Posting bugs in bugzilla is too much work. -- Krzysztof Kotlenga <piernik$gmail,com> xmpp:pocketer@jabber.gda.pl --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 11:45:44PM +0100, Krzysztof Kotlenga wrote:
Vincent Untz <vuntz@novell.com> wrote:
Personally, I think Bugzilla is the best place to report it. It also makes it much easier to track the status.
I think another approach would make sense: users could report it on software.opensuse.org since that's where they look for software.
Then we just need a way to mail the relevant packagers about this "new upstream" report.
+1
Good example: http://www.archlinux.org/packages/ http://www.archlinux.org/packages/flaghelp/
That is a very good example, I likt it. Thank you for sharing it!
Posting bugs in bugzilla is too much work.
Indeed. It's good to hide behind, but that's all. (But we should also work on a connection between the build service and the bug tracker, as they are completely separate right now.) Peter -- "WARNING: This bug is visible to non-employees. Please be respectful!" SUSE LINUX Products GmbH Research & Development
On Wednesday 27 February 2008 20:44:21 wrote Vincent Untz:
Le mercredi 27 février 2008 à 20:15 +0100, Pascal Bleser a écrit :
-----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.
I think another approach would make sense: users could report it on software.opensuse.org since that's where they look for software.
Then we just need a way to mail the relevant packagers about this "new upstream" report.
Yes, we want to link from software.o.o to the project in build.o.o, where a bugzilla link exists. However, I think we should also concentrate to get the upstream mechanism also working on the server and change our packages to use it. We can try to scan upstream automatically and notify the packager, maybe even try an automated build with ugraded version ... -- 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, Feb 28, 2008 at 09:03:24AM +0100, Adrian Schröter wrote:
Yes, we want to link from software.o.o to the project in build.o.o, where a bugzilla link exists.
That "link" you talk about is virtually useless. Do you really think any _user_ goes there (after creating an account in the buildservice) to find the package that the bug concerns, goes then to bugzilla (after creating an account), and enters the report? But maybe someone can give numbers which prove the existance of such bug reports? I certainly don't want to be ignorant here. Am I missing the point? Maybe the link is only meant for the owner of the package himself, to make a note for himself? ;-) Peter -- "WARNING: This bug is visible to non-employees. Please be respectful!" SUSE LINUX Products GmbH Research & Development
Hello, on Mittwoch, 5. März 2008, Dr. Peter Poeml wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 09:03:24AM +0100, Adrian Schröter wrote:
Yes, we want to link from software.o.o to the project in build.o.o, where a bugzilla link exists.
That "link" you talk about is virtually useless.
Do you really think any _user_ goes there (after creating an account in the buildservice) to find the package that the bug concerns, goes then to bugzilla (after creating an account), and enters the report?
But maybe someone can give numbers which prove the existance of such bug reports? I certainly don't want to be ignorant here.
There are some bugreports in bugzilla already: product "opensuse.org" / component "3rd party software". Given that the bugreporting link is quite new and probably many projects still didn't set a bug owner, I'd name it a good start. However, you are right that reporting a bug against a package in the build service is too difficult - you have to login to (build.)opensuse.org to find the bugowner / bugzilla link and then again to (bugzilla.)novell.com to enter the bugreport. Long time ago, when the bugreporting link was discussed, I proposed to use a little script on bugzilla.novell.com that basically enforces the login and then redirects from ...?user=username to enter_bug.cgi?assigned_to=mail@example.com&...[correct component etc.] This method would only need one login (at bugzilla) while still being spam-proof since it only contains the username, not the mail address. The link could be published everywhere (software.o.o, Packager: tag etc.) as a direct bugreporting link. For reasons I don't know the current, IMHO awkward, solution which needs two logins was chosen instead. [That's not meant as an offence, I just mention it as a fact.] But maybe there's still hope that the one-click-bugreport ;-) will be implemented someday ;-)
Am I missing the point? Maybe the link is only meant for the owner of the package himself, to make a note for himself? ;-)
*LoL* Regards, Christian Boltz -- Error: File not found -- search behind couch? (Y/N) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org
On Thursday 06 March 2008 22:52:12 wrote Christian Boltz:
Hello,
on Mittwoch, 5. März 2008, Dr. Peter Poeml wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 09:03:24AM +0100, Adrian Schröter wrote:
Yes, we want to link from software.o.o to the project in build.o.o, where a bugzilla link exists.
That "link" you talk about is virtually useless.
Do you really think any _user_ goes there (after creating an account in the buildservice) to find the package that the bug concerns, goes then to bugzilla (after creating an account), and enters the report?
yes, I do. I do know that they don't atm, but I would like to see more and more users also participating in our development. For instance, when they do not like a package description or anything easy to handle for them, I would like to see that they make their suggestions directly, it would save any extra time to create bugzilla reports and to handle them by others. With that in mind, the question is how we can get there. One important thing is a link from software.o.o to the project in build.o.o I think. Any further ideas ?
But maybe someone can give numbers which prove the existance of such bug reports? I certainly don't want to be ignorant here.
There are some bugreports in bugzilla already: product "opensuse.org" / component "3rd party software".
Given that the bugreporting link is quite new and probably many projects still didn't set a bug owner, I'd name it a good start.
True, we could run a script and set a default everywhere (for example just picking the first person of the project). Would someone complain about this ? (I added a bugowner line into the osc templates for new projects/packages now, need to check how it get handled in the web client.)
However, you are right that reporting a bug against a package in the build service is too difficult - you have to login to (build.)opensuse.org to find the bugowner / bugzilla link and then again to (bugzilla.)novell.com to enter the bugreport.
Long time ago, when the bugreporting link was discussed, I proposed to use a little script on bugzilla.novell.com that basically enforces the login and then redirects from ...?user=username to enter_bug.cgi?assigned_to=mail@example.com&...[correct component etc.]
This method would only need one login (at bugzilla) while still being spam-proof since it only contains the username, not the mail address. The link could be published everywhere (software.o.o, Packager: tag etc.) as a direct bugreporting link.
For reasons I don't know the current, IMHO awkward, solution which needs two logins was chosen instead. [That's not meant as an offence, I just mention it as a fact.]
We could create direct bugzilla links in software.o.o to buzilla, but it would expose the email adress to spammers.... For that reason, we decided to go via authentificated build.o.o for now, it should be usually just one mouse click more (given you use the browsers login/password filling). With a later software.o.o (maybe via the softwareportal), where we have also an optional login there (anyway used for user feedback, comments and so on), we can make direct bugzilla links as well, hopefully. Actually the idea is that also bugzilla links to other bugzillas beside Novells will become possible. 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 Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 08:51:19AM +0100, Adrian Schröter wrote:
I do know that they don't atm, but I would like to see more and more users also participating in our development. For instance, when they do not like a package description or anything easy to handle for them, I would like to see that they make their suggestions directly, it would save any extra time to create bugzilla reports and to handle them by others.
With that in mind, the question is how we can get there. One important thing is a link from software.o.o to the project in build.o.o I think.
At first, opening up build.o.o (or let software.o.o show equivalent data) would allow to _see_ what the facilities for contribution are - before logging in. (Obviously, write access needs a login first.)
Any further ideas ?
How about a comment system like http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/4.1/en/apache.html Although I've never written anything into such a system myself, I find it very useful to have additional info attached _in-place_, and I believe it could bey very convenient for the maintainer(s) of those page(s). (It looks as if the info is perused on later revisions of the documents in order to enhance them, where possible.)
True, we could run a script and set a default everywhere (for example just picking the first person of the project).
Would someone complain about this ?
(I added a bugowner line into the osc templates for new projects/packages now, need to check how it get handled in the web client.)
Seems like a good start. Regarding what Christian noted:
For reasons I don't know the current, IMHO awkward, solution which needs two logins was chosen instead. [That's not meant as an offence, I just mention it as a fact.]
I could not reproduce that -- tried it on Friday and didn't need to log in twice. But it could depend on the day. Peter -- "WARNING: This bug is visible to non-employees. Please be respectful!" SUSE LINUX Products GmbH Research & Development
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 01:19:51PM +0100, Dr. Peter Poeml wrote:
Any further ideas ?
Something else interesting to look at (which i didn't know before I discovered it this morning) is ohloh, a software directory. Here's a project: http://www.ohloh.net/projects/6083 There are news http://www.ohloh.net/projects/6083/rss_articles and links and reviews: http://www.ohloh.net/projects/6083/links http://www.ohloh.net/projects/6083/reviews Further down, there are overviews on code analysis, used licenses, http://www.ohloh.net/projects/6083/analyses/latest contributors, http://www.ohloh.net/projects/6083/contributors commit history, http://www.ohloh.net/projects/6083/commits Further down in the navigation, there are links for _editing_ stuff. Those require a login (obviously). Everything else doesn't. There is a rating system, user profiles, tags and so on. I think a lot of ideas can be scrounged from there. And then we can also have our own ;) (There are also a lot of similarities to good old freshmeat, I guess.) For us, I would find interesting to have - rating - recent activity - download statistics - subscribe to new releases - add comments / reviews - contact the developer(s) - link to upstream project Peter -- "WARNING: This bug is visible to non-employees. Please be respectful!" SUSE LINUX Products GmbH Research & Development
Hello, (sorry for answering that late - just catching up my mail queue after vacation) on Freitag, 7. März 2008, Adrian Schröter wrote:
On Thursday 06 March 2008 22:52:12 wrote Christian Boltz:
on Mittwoch, 5. März 2008, Dr. Peter Poeml wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 09:03:24AM +0100, Adrian Schröter wrote: ... Given that the bugreporting link is quite new and probably many projects still didn't set a bug owner, I'd name it a good start.
True, we could run a script and set a default everywhere (for example just picking the first person of the project).
Would someone complain about this ?
Just do it [tm] ;-) Or (IMHO even better) change the code to default to the first maintainer if no bugowner is set.
However, you are right that reporting a bug against a package in the build service is too difficult - you have to login to (build.)opensuse.org to find the bugowner / bugzilla link and then again to (bugzilla.)novell.com to enter the bugreport.
@Peter: Maybe you didn't have to login twice because you were logged in to *.novell.com (bugzillla etc.) and/or *.opensuse.org (wiki, build service etc.) before already.
Long time ago, when the bugreporting link was discussed, I proposed to use a little script on bugzilla.novell.com that basically enforces the login and then redirects from ...?user=username to enter_bug.cgi?assigned_to=mail@example.com&...[correct component etc.]
This method would only need one login (at bugzilla) while still being spam-proof since it only contains the username, not the mail address. The link could be published everywhere (software.o.o, Packager: tag etc.) as a direct bugreporting link.
For reasons I don't know the current, IMHO awkward, solution which needs two logins was chosen instead. [That's not meant as an offence, I just mention it as a fact.]
We could create direct bugzilla links in software.o.o to buzilla, but it would expose the email adress to spammers....
I'm afraid you missed my point :-( Let me give a step-by-step example for a package built by user "tux" with mail address tux@example.com. The example intentionally does not include repository, package name and version etc. for simplification. They are just additional URL parameters. * bugreporting link on software.o.o and in the packager tag: https://bugzilla.novell.com/obs.cgi?user=tux -> no mail address exposed, only the username (could be even replaced by some random number that is stored in iChain if you really want) * obs.cgi sourcecode: #!/usr/bin/pseudocode ;-) use iChain; if ( ! iChain::logged_in() ) { redirect_to_login_page(); } else { $assignee = url_param('user'); $assignee_mail = iChain::lookup_user_mail($assignee); redirect_to("enter_bug.cgi?assigned_to=" . $assignee_mail); } * what obs.cgi does: -> enforce bugzilla login first -> then redirect to enter_bug.cgi?assigned_to=tux@example.com * important: obs.cgi already runs on the bugzilla domain, so you don't need to login again after being redirected to enter_bug.cgi Well, that's it already ;-) I hope my idea is better understandable now.
For that reason, we decided to go via authentificated build.o.o for now, it should be usually just one mouse click more
... and the login on (build).opensuse.org to be able to access the current bugreporting link ...
(given you use the browsers login/password filling).
Of course - if you have saved your password in the browser, you will never have to login manually. (You can also patch kdesu to save the root password - this avoids the need to enter it whenever you want to break^Wconfigure your system ;-) I hate saving my passwords (not only in the browser) for security reasons. Maybe I'm a bit too paranoid about it, but better safe than sorry ;-) Regards, Christian Boltz -- Gibt es ein Buch über das maßvolle Verwenden von Fußnoten? Wenn ja, dann bin ich bereit, Dir ein Exemplar zu schicken. [Thorsten Haude zu David Haller in sl-etikette] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org
On Sat, 22 Mar 2008, Christian Boltz wrote:
(given you use the browsers login/password filling).
Of course - if you have saved your password in the browser, you will never have to login manually. (You can also patch kdesu to save the root password - this avoids the need to enter it whenever you want to break^Wconfigure your system ;-)
I hate saving my passwords (not only in the browser) for security reasons. Maybe I'm a bit too paranoid about it, but better safe than sorry ;-)
Well, that is a perfectly valid opinion. Thought I for example see it a bit different. I save nearly all of my passwords in such a password safe on my machine (except some really important one, which I always enter by hand). There are too many different logins. ATM 88 entries and 14 ftp passwords there. On the other hand I also encrypt my home partition. The point is not if such tools are used, but how they are used. 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
participants (6)
-
Adrian Schröter -
Christian Boltz -
Dirk Stoecker -
Dr. Peter Poeml -
Krzysztof Kotlenga -
Vincent Untz