On 2021/09/14 17:57, Simon Lees wrote:

But in summary getting a new package to users is generally a multi day process and so you wind up with various dates depending on which part of the process you look at but we consider the date in the email to be the unique identifier for each snapshot.

--- And where in the release is that date recorded? The cpeid date is the only date recorded in a release, so any tool that looks at the release only has that date available. Yet from what you say, the date on the email is somewhat unrelated to the version date listed inside the "repomd.xml" file. Usually, if you run a program, there is often a version option to display the current version -- but that comes from within the object. Anyone looking at one of the releases on a DVD won't necessarily have the release email, but they will have the date that is internal to repomd.xml. Is there anyway the release date could be gleaned from the repomd.xml to be used as the date in the repo release notification? This could be shorter as you don't need the primary.xml filename, but, a parse script like: # find TW data in repomd file; first only cpeid-date, # but 2nd parm as HASH of wanted dats as pointers to answer buffs # 2nd parameter is hash; currently only 1 useful item # 1) "primary_locp" - a pointer to the name of # the primary file for this repomd file sub find_repo_data($;$) { my $p = shift; my $repomd_file = shift; # alternate data pointers my $altdp = @_ ? HASH shift : {}; my $num_altdp = 0+@{[keys %$altdp]}; my ($primary_locp, $distro_date); #TPe "RD:%s)",$repomd_file; open(my $repo_h, "<", $repomd_file) || die P "Err $! opening %s", $repomd_file; while(defined($_=<$repo_h>)) { chomp; if (m{^\s+}) { $distro_date=$1; #TPe "got cpeid($1)"; last unless $altdp; } elsif ($primary_locp = $altdp->{primary_locp} and m{find_repo_data($_[0]); } Wouldn't be hard to syncronize the email date w/the internal date

On 9/15/21 08:04, L A Walsh wrote:

...

I have a question about the date listed in the subject.

If I look at the repomd.xml file in oss/repodata, on dl.os.org, I see a timestamp of 09-Sep-2021 13:48 (i.e. 20210909 , not 20210908).

Looking inside that file I see the cpeid having a value of 20210907!

I do not know what file you are looking at, but if I look inside repomd.xml of Tumbleweed snapshot 20210908 I see date 20210908. http://download.opensuse.org/history/20210908/tumbleweed/repo/oss/repodata/r...

On 2021/09/14 22:43, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:

...

On 9/15/21 08:04, L A Walsh wrote:

...

I have a question about the date listed in the subject.

If I look at the repomd.xml file in oss/repodata, on dl.os.org, I see a timestamp of 09-Sep-2021 13:48 (i.e. 20210909 , not 20210908).

Looking inside that file I see the cpeid having a value of 20210907!

I do not know what file you are looking at, but if I look inside repomd.xml of Tumbleweed snapshot 20210908 I see date 20210908.

But that's not the repomd.xml that was at download.opensuse.org/tumbleweed/repo/oss/repodata/repomd.xml after her announcement -- that's part of the problem -- her announcement proceeds that file being updated. http://download.opensuse.org/history/20210908/tumbleweed/repo/oss/repodata/r... The file you get from 'history' shows a last-mod date of 20210909, which seems to indicate it wasn't put in place until the day after the release announcement. I've been taking her release announcement as being what's available at http:download.opensuse.org/tumbleweed/repo/oss/repodata/repomd.xml (as I thought that was the current release). I hadn't thought of use 'history/date' to download the current release (until you just now mentioned it). I'll have to watch, but would have thought when she announced "X", that was the version at 'current' (download.opensuse.org/tumbleweed/repo/oss/repodata/repomd.xml) and wouldn't expect current to show up in 'history' until the next current is announded (at which time what was 'current' became 'history'). Though I see that having no release yet announced for the 14th, the release for the 13th is in(at) both 'current' and the 0913 history URL. Does (or will) the release being announced, appear in history at the same time? It seems like it appears a day later, given the filemod time. I.e. the file with the 0913 date in the cpeid field has a last mod date of 0914.

On 9/16/21 14:44, Stefan Seyfried wrote:

On 16.09.21 04:24, L A Walsh wrote:

...

http://download.opensuse.org/history/20210908/tumbleweed/repo/oss/repodata/r...

...

The file you get from 'history' shows a last-mod date of 20210909, which seems to indicate it wasn't put in place until the day after the release announcement. Subject: New Tumbleweed snapshot 20210908 released! From: Dominique Leuenberger To: factory@lists.opensuse.org Mail-Followup-To: factory@lists.opensuse.org Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2021 10:00:53 +0000 Message-ID: <163126805338.15681.9955158119170188019@go-agent-stagingbot-7>

Your perception of dates seems warped.

Well ones perspective of date and time is always relative to where they are in the world as well as whether the time and date being specified are in there local time, server time or the time when they were created on the machine they were created on (there is a chance all 3 are going on here). -- 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 2021/09/16 00:12, Dominique Leuenberger / DimStar wrote:

The most relevant information you might be missing is that the 'snapshot release date' is the 'date, when the checkin round for said snapshot happened,

==== Ok, that explains quite a bit. I wasn't parsing your subject as being the snapshot date, but as being the snapshot-release date, for example Snapshot#20210914 was released on 20210916(~4am PDT). and was wondering why a release dated 0914 wouldn't be released until 0916 -- but that's because it's the date the snapshot was taken. It was disconcerting in my own download process why, what appeared to be the latest download, was 2 days old. I'm zooming in on some details around my download process like wanting to know that the last-mod timestamps I'm seeing are correct. Seems to be the case despite over zealous spam processing (which isn't done by you, I understand)...I guess I'd still be a bit embarrassed by the poor implementation done in your name, but that's more just me -- and like how I get embarrassed when gmail does something flakey (as they don't follow mail-RFC's...*sigh*). thanks for the explanation, -linda