Op donderdag 2 februari 2017 16:59:46 CET schreef Ludwig Nussel:

Hi,

As announced in December¹, Leap 42.3 is already open for submissions. We shouldn't expect big updates in 42.3, nevertheless some went in already, like texlive 2016. Also, some packages that we already know SLE will take from Factory also got updated like e.g. YaST. So far the current state looks quite good in openQA² so the adventurous may already zypper dup.

What's missing still is a roadmap for the release. SLE12SP3 aims for a release in September. Due to the holiday season in August where many developers are likely unavailable anyways development is expected to be finished before. So my proposal would be to also finish with Leap before and aim for a release at the last Wednesday of July.

With regard to the release model I'd like to try something new. Rather than having fixed milestones with fixed submission deadlines every few weeks let's try to adopt a model similar to Tumbleweed's. Ie have snapshots released automatically based on openQA results. Nevertheless the closer we get to the release the stricter the rules for updating packages have to be.

cu Ludwig

[1] https://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-factory/2016-12/msg00165.html [2] https://openqa.opensuse.org/group_overview/28

Re. that last bit: I love the idea to keep Leap 42.3 rolling until release. This as a personal opinion -- Gertjan Lettink, a.k.a. Knurpht openSUSE Board Member openSUSE Forums Team -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On 02/03/2017 02:29 AM, Ludwig Nussel wrote:

Hi,

With regard to the release model I'd like to try something new. Rather than having fixed milestones with fixed submission deadlines every few weeks let's try to adopt a model similar to Tumbleweed's. Ie have snapshots released automatically based on openQA results. Nevertheless the closer we get to the release the stricter the rules for updating packages have to be.

cu Ludwig

[1] https://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-factory/2016-12/msg00165.html [2] https://openqa.opensuse.org/group_overview/28

It would probably still be good to have a feature freeze at some point I guess? If so it would be nice to know the date a reasonable time in advance. -- 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

Quick inquiry into where to ask or demand for new packages or versions to be included into 42.3? On this list? Example: please upgrade shorewall package (shorewall.net) at least to the one from tumbleweed 5.0.x or better to current stable releases 5.1.x There is more that I think I have in the back of my mind that I come across every now and then, e.g. more current iptables and related. Then I remember some pretty basic stuff but I cant really remember the details any more, maybe it was core utils maybe something different but basic gnu linux stuff which had been old in contrast to what I found at the official source back then. Sorry to annoy. TIA. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On Tuesday, 14 March 2017 14:55:48 CET cagsm wrote:

Quick inquiry into where to ask or demand for new packages or versions to be included into 42.3? On this list? Example: please upgrade shorewall package (shorewall.net) at least to the one from tumbleweed 5.0.x or better to current stable releases 5.1.x […]

anyone can create an account on build.opensuse.org and get involved. Also in general anyone can do a "submit request" which in this case would be the update from openSUSE:Factory to openSUSE:Leap:42.3 but it might be beneficial to get in contact with the maintainer of the package. Maybe there is a good reason why there has been no update already submitted. Maybe the maintainer is thankful for your reminder. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 11:31 AM, Oliver Kurz wrote:

On Tuesday, 14 March 2017 14:55:48 CET cagsm wrote:

...

Quick inquiry into where to ask or demand for new packages or versions to be included into 42.3? On this list? Example: please upgrade shorewall package (shorewall.net) at least to the one from tumbleweed 5.0.x or better to current stable releases 5.1.x […]

anyone can create an account on build.opensuse.org and get involved. Also in general anyone can do a "submit request" which in this case would be the update from openSUSE:Factory to openSUSE:Leap:42.3 but it might be beneficial to get in contact with the maintainer of the package. Maybe there is a good reason why there has been no update already submitted. Maybe the maintainer is thankful for your reminder.

Cagsm, Consider the package python-plaso which I maintain. It is in factory, but not in 42.3 (yet). https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/openSUSE:Factory/python-plaso If you go to the "requests" tab and look at declined requests, then you see there weren't any. Those would be outbound requests (ie. from factory to Leap). If there were any declined requests you could review them and any comments to see why the package wasn't already accepted into Leap 42.3. If there aren't any, or you think the reason for the previous decline was corrected, you can initiate a request of your own. Feel free to do that for python-plaso, I want it in 43..3, so no reason for you not to initiate the request. To do that, you have to be logged in (use your bugzilla credentials). Then from overview page for /openSUSE:Factory/python-plaso click submit pacakge. In the target project put "openSUSE:Leap:42.3", then leave the package blank. Do put a short narrative description of why your doing the SR. As a maintainer, I normally just say "package update" or similat. When you send in the plaso SR, as the maintainer/reviewer I will get sent an email with the details of the SR in in. I can approve the submission, decline it, or ask questions (of you). fyi: When I log into OBS I have a queue of SRs and reviews incoming and also a queue of SRs outgoing. Those queues are part of the workflow, so your leveraging them just fits into the normal workflow for a maintainer/reviewer. Greg -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

cagsm wrote:

Quick inquiry into where to ask or demand for new packages or versions to be included into 42.3? On this list? Example: please upgrade shorewall package (shorewall.net) at least to the one from tumbleweed 5.0.x or better to current stable releases 5.1.x

There is more that I think I have in the back of my mind that I come across every now and then, e.g. more current iptables and related. Then I remember some pretty basic stuff but I cant really remember the details any more, maybe it was core utils maybe something different but basic gnu linux stuff which had been old in contrast to what I found at the official source back then. Sorry to annoy.

Quoting myself:

42.3 continues the 42 line of Leap and is meant to be a small service pack alike refresh. We need a smooth upgrade without surprises from 42.2 to 42.3. With that in mind I'd like to remind package maintainers that we don't have to and can not offer the latest and greatest of everything.

So if you think a package is safe to upgrade but wasn't yet, then please get in contact with the package maintainer(s). cu Ludwig -- (o_ Ludwig Nussel //\ V_/_ http://www.suse.com/ SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 5:19 PM, Simon Lees wrote:

On 03/15/2017 02:01 AM, Oliver Kurz wrote:

...

On Tuesday, 14 March 2017 14:55:48 CET cagsm wrote:

...

Quick inquiry into where to ask or demand for new packages or versions to be included into 42.3? On this list? Example: please upgrade shorewall package (shorewall.net) at least to the one from tumbleweed 5.0.x or better to current stable releases 5.1.x […]

anyone can create an account on build.opensuse.org and get involved. Also in general anyone can do a "submit request" which in this case would be the update from openSUSE:Factory to openSUSE:Leap:42.3 but it might be beneficial to get in contact with the maintainer of the package. Maybe there is a good reason why there has been no update already submitted. Maybe the maintainer is thankful for your reminder.

Anyone can, but not anyone should, you should only do that if A) You are willing to provide security / maintenance updates in Leap 42.3 as required or B) you have spoken to someone else ie the maintainer and they are happy to do this for you. Either way you should speak to the maintainer first if you are not the maintainer.

Simon, Correct me if I'm wrong and this is my understanding, and may not have any bearing on reality. :) ===== There is a LeapBot scanning factory and somehow making autonomous (or rule-based) decisions to send SRs from factory to Leap 42.3. The maintainers get a review SR notice and it is in their queue. The maintainer has to take an active step of saying OK (or similar) to the SR before it accepted into Leap 42.3 Thus maintainers of both packages and Leap 42.3 have an established workflow. ===== So you're saying that while the LeapBot can send SRs without talking to the maintainers, us humans have to first talk to the maintainer, then initiate the SR. First time I recall being relegated to a status lower than a bot. :( Greg -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On Wednesday, 15 March 2017 18:37 Bruno Friedmann wrote:

Ludwig as Leap Leader, I've this question. For shorewall 4.6.13.4 is the last stable of 4x series (but it doesn't receive any fixes from upstream right now).

There in between a 5.0 and now the new 5.1x version. Moving from 4 to 5 works (tested hopefully, at least in my usecases), but a migration of configuration is needed by admin (it is somewhat automated shorewall -a ... do most of the jobs, but a review by the firewall admin is mandatory (at least this is the advise I apply to myself).

I will in few hours get the new 5.1.3 in netfilter repo. And of course I can push that to Leap (I use both of them). My question is : upgrading to such new version isn't against Leap spirit ?

I'm not Ludwig but this is my view. Incompatible configuration requiring (in general) manual intervention is IMHO something we should try to avoid withing Leap 42.x series whenever possible. If we don't, we lose the main advantage we have compared to the pre-Leap era. On the other hand, maintaining version abandoned by upstream isn't really desirable either. In the end, it should be maintainer's call, IMHO, because it's the maintainer who is going to handle the fallout in either case, whether it's going to be angry users whose setups breaks on 42.2 -> 42.3 migration or having to address bugs and security issues in version no longer supported by upstream. Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Michal Kubecek wrote:

On Wednesday, 15 March 2017 18:37 Bruno Friedmann wrote:

...

Ludwig as Leap Leader, I've this question. For shorewall 4.6.13.4 is the last stable of 4x series (but it doesn't receive any fixes from upstream right now).

There in between a 5.0 and now the new 5.1x version. Moving from 4 to 5 works (tested hopefully, at least in my usecases), but a migration of configuration is needed by admin (it is somewhat automated shorewall -a ... do most of the jobs, but a review by the firewall admin is mandatory (at least this is the advise I apply to myself).

I will in few hours get the new 5.1.3 in netfilter repo. And of course I can push that to Leap (I use both of them). My question is : upgrading to such new version isn't against Leap spirit ?

I'm not Ludwig but this is my view.

Incompatible configuration requiring (in general) manual intervention is IMHO something we should try to avoid withing Leap 42.x series whenever possible. If we don't, we lose the main advantage we have compared to the pre-Leap era. On the other hand, maintaining version abandoned by upstream isn't really desirable either.

In the end, it should be maintainer's call, IMHO, because it's the maintainer who is going to handle the fallout in either case, whether it's going to be angry users whose setups breaks on 42.2 -> 42.3 migration or having to address bugs and security issues in version no longer supported by upstream.

Well said. Sometimes upstream is friendly and keeps maintaining old stable branches if they know it's needed for a stable distribution though. So communication and good relations with upstream is valuable. On the other hand even if upstream doesn't care it doesn't mean the software falls apart. We have tons of packages where no upstream even exists anymore. Sometimes from user PoV it's actually better to live with known bugs that can be worked around rather than having to deal with new ones. cu Ludwig -- (o_ Ludwig Nussel //\ V_/_ http://www.suse.com/ SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org