Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
On 09/08/2018 07:43 AM, Kalev Lember wrote: OK, builds done and the 3.30.0 megaupdate is in Bodhi now and queued for updates-testing: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-85d637c544 Just as a quick heads up, this was accepted as a Freeze Exception in yesterday's blocker review meeting. We've tracked down a few regressions in the initial megaupdate and (hopefully) fixed those, and I think it should be good to go to stable soon. Bodhi karma and testing appreciated if you're running F29 with updates-testing enabled. Also if you've already added karma, please do it again as the edits reset all the +1's added so far. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-85d637c544 -- Thanks, Kalev ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
vte and gnome-terminal have a bunch of downstream patches and require special handling because of that. Rishi is fixing them and they are coming later as well. Kalev On Sat, Sep 8, 2018, 12:55 Igor Gnatenko wrote: > What about gnome-terminal & vte291? They seem to be stuck on 2.28 release. > > On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 12:45 PM Kalev Lember > wrote: > >> On Sat, Sep 8, 2018, 12:06 Fabio Valentini wrote: >> >>> On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 7:44 AM Kalev Lember >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > OK, builds done and the 3.30.0 megaupdate is in Bodhi now and queued >>> for >>> > updates-testing: >>> > >>> > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-85d637c544 >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Kalev >>> >>> Are gjs 3.30 and mozjs60 missing from the megaupdate on purpose, or >>> were they missed? >>> >> >> On purpose. I left new gjs out of the megaupdate because I noticed some >> regressions with it when doing local smoke testing last night and didn't >> have time to debug it further. >> >> You can get the build from koji for now if you need. I'll get it >> submitted to Bodhi next week once I get it to pass my own smoke testing. >> >> Kalev >> ___ >> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org >> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html >> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines >> List Archives: >> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org >> > -- > > -Igor Gnatenko > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > On Sep 8, 2018 12:55, "Igor Gnatenko" wrote: What about gnome-terminal & vte291? They seem to be stuck on 2.28 release. On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 12:45 PM Kalev Lember wrote: > On Sat, Sep 8, 2018, 12:06 Fabio Valentini wrote: > >> On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 7:44 AM Kalev Lember >> wrote: >> > >> > OK, builds done and the 3.30.0 megaupdate is in Bodhi now and queued for >> > updates-testing: >> > >> > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-85d637c544 >> > >> > -- >> > Kalev >> >> Are gjs 3.30 and mozjs60 missing from the megaupdate on purpose, or >> were they missed? >> > > On purpose. I left new gjs out of the megaupdate because I noticed some > regressions with it when doing local smoke testing last night and didn't > have time to debug it further. > > You can get the build from koji for now if you need. I'll get it submitted > to Bodhi next week once I get it to pass my own smoke testing. > > Kalev > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > > -- -Igor Gnatenko ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
What about gnome-terminal & vte291? They seem to be stuck on 2.28 release. On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 12:45 PM Kalev Lember wrote: > On Sat, Sep 8, 2018, 12:06 Fabio Valentini wrote: > >> On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 7:44 AM Kalev Lember >> wrote: >> > >> > OK, builds done and the 3.30.0 megaupdate is in Bodhi now and queued for >> > updates-testing: >> > >> > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-85d637c544 >> > >> > -- >> > Kalev >> >> Are gjs 3.30 and mozjs60 missing from the megaupdate on purpose, or >> were they missed? >> > > On purpose. I left new gjs out of the megaupdate because I noticed some > regressions with it when doing local smoke testing last night and didn't > have time to debug it further. > > You can get the build from koji for now if you need. I'll get it submitted > to Bodhi next week once I get it to pass my own smoke testing. > > Kalev > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > -- -Igor Gnatenko ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
On Sat, Sep 8, 2018, 12:06 Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 7:44 AM Kalev Lember wrote: > > > > OK, builds done and the 3.30.0 megaupdate is in Bodhi now and queued for > > updates-testing: > > > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-85d637c544 > > > > -- > > Kalev > > Are gjs 3.30 and mozjs60 missing from the megaupdate on purpose, or > were they missed? > On purpose. I left new gjs out of the megaupdate because I noticed some regressions with it when doing local smoke testing last night and didn't have time to debug it further. You can get the build from koji for now if you need. I'll get it submitted to Bodhi next week once I get it to pass my own smoke testing. Kalev ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 7:44 AM Kalev Lember wrote: > > OK, builds done and the 3.30.0 megaupdate is in Bodhi now and queued for > updates-testing: > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-85d637c544 > > -- > Kalev Are gjs 3.30 and mozjs60 missing from the megaupdate on purpose, or were they missed? Fabio > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
OK, builds done and the 3.30.0 megaupdate is in Bodhi now and queued for updates-testing: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-85d637c544 -- Kalev ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 07:17:29PM -0400, Gerald Henriksen wrote: > >Uh, to be clear here: you do know that 3.29 is the development series > >for 3.30, right? It's not a sudden major release jump. Effectively what > >we have right now is more or less 3.30 rc0-and-a-bit; the proposal is > >to go from that to 3.30 stable. > Is it though in terms of what is actually in Fedora? > The original message that started this stated: > -- > We are quite a bit behind with the builds, like half of GNOME is still > at 3.28.x or at various stages of 3.29.x snapshots, so there's quite a > bit of catching up to do. > -- Yeah, normally we are closer; this is a larger jump than usual, which warrants the extra concern. Personally, I'm okay with it as long as desktop team people are signed up to help test and make sure any problems are fixed so the release isn't delayed. -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
On Thu, 06 Sep 2018 11:33:20 -0700, you wrote: >On Thu, 2018-09-06 at 10:41 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: >> Fedora folks have been testing 3.29 for weeks now. Fedora people >> haven't been testing 3.30 because it's not really available to test. >> So I think it's reasonable for a GNOME specific change to explicitly >> state a request and expectation for a beta freeze exception for every >> Fedora release so that a .0 lands in the beta, and see if FESCo thinks >> that's sane and accepts the change. > >Uh, to be clear here: you do know that 3.29 is the development series >for 3.30, right? It's not a sudden major release jump. Effectively what >we have right now is more or less 3.30 rc0-and-a-bit; the proposal is >to go from that to 3.30 stable. Is it though in terms of what is actually in Fedora? The original message that started this stated: -- We are quite a bit behind with the builds, like half of GNOME is still at 3.28.x or at various stages of 3.29.x snapshots, so there's quite a bit of catching up to do. -- which isn't quite the same thing as saying its the same thing 3.30 rc0 Which would also appear to mean it will be a more intrusive and hence risky update than it would be if Gnome has actually been at a 3.30 rc0-and-a-bit stage. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 12:33 PM, Adam Williamson > wrote: > > On Thu, 2018-09-06 at 10:41 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > >> Fedora folks have been testing 3.29 for weeks now. Fedora people > >> haven't been testing 3.30 because it's not really available to test. > >> So I think it's reasonable for a GNOME specific change to explicitly > >> state a request and expectation for a beta freeze exception for every > >> Fedora release so that a .0 lands in the beta, and see if FESCo thinks > >> that's sane and accepts the change. > > > > Uh, to be clear here: you do know that 3.29 is the development series > > for 3.30, right? It's not a sudden major release jump. Effectively what > > we have right now is more or less 3.30 rc0-and-a-bit; the proposal is > > to go from that to 3.30 stable. > > I'm aware. > > But it's also striking me as a big deal that's no big deal, like we're > playing a game of upping the vaguarity ante. Nope, completely not, we do this most release cycles and not just gnome... it also doesn't affect any of the artifacts that don't ship gnome compents. Having been involved in this process for so long I'm kind of surprised the biggest deal of all of this is that this is a "big deal"... the fact is post beta we open up the flood gates again so this is going to be there so IMO I'd sooner it now where we can get people that do a "quick fly by beta live CD boot" before they upgrade and catch the issues now than at GA :) ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 12:33 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2018-09-06 at 10:41 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: >> Fedora folks have been testing 3.29 for weeks now. Fedora people >> haven't been testing 3.30 because it's not really available to test. >> So I think it's reasonable for a GNOME specific change to explicitly >> state a request and expectation for a beta freeze exception for every >> Fedora release so that a .0 lands in the beta, and see if FESCo thinks >> that's sane and accepts the change. > > Uh, to be clear here: you do know that 3.29 is the development series > for 3.30, right? It's not a sudden major release jump. Effectively what > we have right now is more or less 3.30 rc0-and-a-bit; the proposal is > to go from that to 3.30 stable. I'm aware. But it's also striking me as a big deal that's no big deal, like we're playing a game of upping the vaguarity ante. -- Chris Murphy ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
On Thu, 2018-09-06 at 20:42 +0200, Tomasz Torcz wrote: > > Also, Fedora is much more than Workstation now. There is server, > cloud, and other editions. We shouldn't circumvent our processes for > some collection of packages important for one edition only. There's no 'circumvention' being discussed. The freeze exception system is a part of our release processes. We *often* grant FEs that are of interest to one desktop or edition only, including for non-blocking ones. We currently have accepted FEs for XFCE and LXqt. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 01:21:52PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 12:56 PM Tomasz Torcz wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 10:15:26PM +0530, Parag Nemade wrote: > > > > > > > > I'd be *strongly* disinclined to give a Freeze Exception for a GNOME > > > > mega-update. There's just far too much that could go wrong. Please > > plan to > > > > land the mega-update in updates-testing once the Freeze lifts. U-T is > > > > enabled by default on the Beta, so people will pick it up on their > > first > > > > post-install update anyway. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please don't stop this update. There will be few required fixes in this > > > megaupdate which we need early to test. > > > > Can you get exceptions for specific packages fixing specific bugs? > > > > Of course, that's what the Freeze Exception process is for. Propose a bug > as a blocker or freeze exception using > https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/propose_bug Actually, what I've meant: instead of landing whole bunch of new packages, identify a relation between reported bugs and specific package. Then apply for FE for specific bugs/package combination, and if granted, include it in update. It should be possible, as there are “few required fixes”, so I assume the issues fixed are tracked in bugs. In other words, put in only packages fixing known bugs. Do not put everything that GNOME Project released as 3.30. Also, Fedora is much more than Workstation now. There is server, cloud, and other editions. We shouldn't circumvent our processes for some collection of packages important for one edition only. -- Tomasz Torcz "God, root, what's the difference?" xmpp: zdzich...@chrome.pl "God is more forgiving." ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
On Thu, 2018-09-06 at 10:41 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > Fedora folks have been testing 3.29 for weeks now. Fedora people > haven't been testing 3.30 because it's not really available to test. > So I think it's reasonable for a GNOME specific change to explicitly > state a request and expectation for a beta freeze exception for every > Fedora release so that a .0 lands in the beta, and see if FESCo thinks > that's sane and accepts the change. Uh, to be clear here: you do know that 3.29 is the development series for 3.30, right? It's not a sudden major release jump. Effectively what we have right now is more or less 3.30 rc0-and-a-bit; the proposal is to go from that to 3.30 stable. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
On Thu, 2018-09-06 at 10:13 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:59 PM, Adam Williamson > wrote: > > On Wed, 2018-09-05 at 12:14 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > > > My opinion, since there are few facts to go on to overcome the burden > > > stated in a written process and schedule for some time, is -1 FE. If > > > it was important enough to get 3.30 on actual Beta installation media, > > > it needed to be done before freeze. Not depend on a freeze exception. > > > That is definitely not how things are supposed to work. > > > > As it happens, it is how things have been working, though. We've > > granted freeze exceptions for GNOME megaupdates for many of the last > > several releases (I can go back and get precise numbers if you like). > > That's OK. Besides, there's some chance I have voted +1 FE for a GNOME > megaupdate, not least of which is because: > > > > Notably, I can't recall a single instance where they broke the world. > > This is not something I can say about a lot of packages, so I think the > > desktop team deserves some credit and trust for that. > > For sure. But that is orthogonal to freeze exception. It's like using > FE as some kind of Good Job sticker. I wouldn't say it's orthogonal, at all. It's a significant factor. It's true to say that we shouldn't grant something FE status *solely because* we don't think it's likely to break anything terribly. It's not *sufficient* justification in itself. But if there is, let's say, a plausible case for "there are some good reasons to let this in Beta" but *also* a plausible case for "...but it's kinda late and we don't absolutely *need* it and it's change!", then the track record of that team and that kind of change absolutely does factor into whether I'm likely to vote +1. > And we all know there is increased probability that blocker bugs are > not found or are found later than otherwise, because of diverted > attention toward testing the megaupdate. There is no way of predicting > or assessing this, but logically it's true. And so this particular > usage of freeze exception ends up having more in common with craps, > than a well deserved Good Job sticker. Eh. I don't think more people testing Workstation, for whatever reason, is really going to be a *bad* thing. Maybe the increased attention causes us to find a blocker we'd otherwise have missed? -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 9:01 AM, Bastien Nocera wrote: > > > - Original Message - >> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 9:04 AM, Kalev Lember wrote: >> >> >> > Dunno what to do wrt the ongoing freeze and getting final 3.30 in F29 >> > Beta, I guess it may be too late for that. Any opinions from QA here? >> >> >> If 3.29 is not what GNOME folks had ever wanted to ship in the Beta, >> why are we hearing about it one week before go/nogo? The schedule has >> been published for what, 9 months? *shrug* > > GNOME has been releasing every 6 months on pretty much the same dates > for more than 10 years, and Fedora's schedule is modelled after GNOME's > for the purpose of getting things like GNOME, and other bi-yearly > time-based releases into Fedora. So Fedora knows well what schedule it > needs to adopt to get a .0 version of GNOME into the beta. > > With GNOME 3.30 having been released yesterday, on schedule, I'm not sure > how either the Fedora packagers or the upstream could have done things > differently. That is a very reasonable response but also doesn't actually answer the question. The schedules have been misaligned for months, so why only bring up that misalignment now and characterize it as if it's a big deal? There is an incongruency happening. It does present the appearance GNOME expects a persistent and on-going exception for beta freeze. Is that a fair characterization? If the schedules themselves do not align and will not ever align and it's important for .0 version of GNOME to be in the beta, I'd like to see some way of making that happen that does not involve the roll of the dice that is freeze exception as applied to something as complex and massive as *GNOME megaupdate* sounds and is and really only a few people could possibly properly assess, which isn't how FE works. Fedora folks have been testing 3.29 for weeks now. Fedora people haven't been testing 3.30 because it's not really available to test. So I think it's reasonable for a GNOME specific change to explicitly state a request and expectation for a beta freeze exception for every Fedora release so that a .0 lands in the beta, and see if FESCo thinks that's sane and accepts the change. But such as it is, the schedule is the schedule, warts and all, and freeze exception is for bugs. It's not for realigning misaligned schedules. > As a sidenote, this tone of discourse is frankly getting old. GNOME aren't > there to spite you. Never said that nor implied it. I asked two questions. There's tone in asking questions? -- Chris Murphy ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
On Thu, 6 Sep 2018 at 11:02, Bastien Nocera wrote: > > > > - Original Message - > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 9:04 AM, Kalev Lember wrote: > > > > > > > Dunno what to do wrt the ongoing freeze and getting final 3.30 in F29 > > > Beta, I guess it may be too late for that. Any opinions from QA here? > > > > > > If 3.29 is not what GNOME folks had ever wanted to ship in the Beta, > > why are we hearing about it one week before go/nogo? The schedule has > > been published for what, 9 months? *shrug* > > GNOME has been releasing every 6 months on pretty much the same dates > for more than 10 years, and Fedora's schedule is modelled after GNOME's > for the purpose of getting things like GNOME, and other bi-yearly > time-based releases into Fedora. So Fedora knows well what schedule it > needs to adopt to get a .0 version of GNOME into the beta. > > With GNOME 3.30 having been released yesterday, on schedule, I'm not sure > how either the Fedora packagers or the upstream could have done things > differently. What the Fedora packagers/desktop group should have done is something like the following: 1. Made it clear to releng/QA/FESCO that the release date was X. [This was done] 2. Made it clear that they would need either to move the beta or get an out of band exception ready for it. [This doesn't seem to have been done.] 3. Keep bringing it up regularly to keep it in people's brain buffers. [This was definitely not done.] Yes that is people work when coding is more fun, but it is what keeps this blowing up every release. Most groups and individuals have been following those rules above and this makes it feel like they did it for all for nothing. So of course they are going to be pissed off when any group be it GNOME, systemd, gcc/glibc, python, kernel, etc comes in during a freeze and act like they should get an exception automatically. > > As a sidenote, this tone of discourse is frankly getting old. GNOME aren't > there to spite you. That is a two way street. The distribution doesn't have these processes in order to spite you but to try and make releases smoother and faster out the door so you aren't waiting 4 months after your release to get it on Fedora users desktops. I -- Stephen J Smoogen. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:59 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2018-09-05 at 12:14 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: >> My opinion, since there are few facts to go on to overcome the burden >> stated in a written process and schedule for some time, is -1 FE. If >> it was important enough to get 3.30 on actual Beta installation media, >> it needed to be done before freeze. Not depend on a freeze exception. >> That is definitely not how things are supposed to work. > > As it happens, it is how things have been working, though. We've > granted freeze exceptions for GNOME megaupdates for many of the last > several releases (I can go back and get precise numbers if you like). That's OK. Besides, there's some chance I have voted +1 FE for a GNOME megaupdate, not least of which is because: > Notably, I can't recall a single instance where they broke the world. > This is not something I can say about a lot of packages, so I think the > desktop team deserves some credit and trust for that. For sure. But that is orthogonal to freeze exception. It's like using FE as some kind of Good Job sticker. And we all know there is increased probability that blocker bugs are not found or are found later than otherwise, because of diverted attention toward testing the megaupdate. There is no way of predicting or assessing this, but logically it's true. And so this particular usage of freeze exception ends up having more in common with craps, than a well deserved Good Job sticker. -- Chris Murphy ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
- Original Message - > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 9:04 AM, Kalev Lember wrote: > > > > Dunno what to do wrt the ongoing freeze and getting final 3.30 in F29 > > Beta, I guess it may be too late for that. Any opinions from QA here? > > > If 3.29 is not what GNOME folks had ever wanted to ship in the Beta, > why are we hearing about it one week before go/nogo? The schedule has > been published for what, 9 months? *shrug* GNOME has been releasing every 6 months on pretty much the same dates for more than 10 years, and Fedora's schedule is modelled after GNOME's for the purpose of getting things like GNOME, and other bi-yearly time-based releases into Fedora. So Fedora knows well what schedule it needs to adopt to get a .0 version of GNOME into the beta. With GNOME 3.30 having been released yesterday, on schedule, I'm not sure how either the Fedora packagers or the upstream could have done things differently. As a sidenote, this tone of discourse is frankly getting old. GNOME aren't there to spite you. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 04:47:32PM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 1:50 PM Matthew Miller > wrote: > > > We used to always have a Change submitted for the GNOME update, but that > > stopped, I assume because it felt like kind of rote bureaucracy rather than > > helpful, since it was basically the same every time. Maybe it's useful after > > all to help keep communications open for situations like this? > > > It may come as no surprise given my role, but I'm in favor of > continuing to submit Change proposals for GNOME updates and similar. > I'd be open to a "shortcut" version of the Change process that > essentially says "hey, we're doing this again". But this way we'd get > visibility across teams and externally. For better or for worse, our > Change list is a starting point for marketing and PR, so it's > beneficial to have these sorts of things visible externally, too. +1 For recurrent Changes, I think it is totally OK to just copy text Change page, update the numbers and dates, and resubmit. Zbyszek ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
Dne 6.9.2018 v 01:59 Matthew Miller napsal(a): > On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 04:47:32PM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: >> I'd be open to a "shortcut" version of the Change process that >> essentially says "hey, we're doing this again". But this way we'd get >> visibility across teams and externally. For better or for worse, our >> Change list is a starting point for marketing and PR, so it's >> beneficial to have these sorts of things visible externally, too. > The self-contained changes _should_ basically serve as "shortcuts", > but it does seem like there are a number of these "new version of X" changes > that could benefit from an even more short version, including one-time FESCo > approval rather than needing to be re-upped as long as nothing significant > changes? > I foresee that one day you will come back to my proposal to do not distinguish between system-wide and self-contained changes and you will rather judge them by the feedback they raise on the ML ;) V. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
On Wed, 2018-09-05 at 12:14 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 9:04 AM, Kalev Lember wrote: > > > > Dunno what to do wrt the ongoing freeze and getting final 3.30 in F29 > > Beta, I guess it may be too late for that. Any opinions from QA here? > > If 3.29 is not what GNOME folks had ever wanted to ship in the Beta, > why are we hearing about it one week before go/nogo? The schedule has > been published for what, 9 months? *shrug* > > I do not like the idea that it is a QA decision to enforce or relax > the schedule. This isn't what freeze exception is intended for. It's > intended for abrasive, ugly, or annoying bugs, that simply do not > qualify as release blocking and the fix for which is unlikely to > itself become a blocker. There is no information presented for QA to > even assess this question as it stands. Neither the blocker / FE process, nor its decisions, are owned by QA. By policy it is a joint effort between QA, release engineering and development. > The next blocker and freeze exception review is on Monday. We cannot > even get a release candidate until all known blockers are cleared. The > earliest we likely see any kind of compose with 3.30 would be maybe > 1800UTC on Tuesday? Freeze exceptions can be granted out-of-band with voting in-bug. We've granted two today already. > Haha! Not even two days of testing? That's > comical. > > My opinion, since there are few facts to go on to overcome the burden > stated in a written process and schedule for some time, is -1 FE. If > it was important enough to get 3.30 on actual Beta installation media, > it needed to be done before freeze. Not depend on a freeze exception. > That is definitely not how things are supposed to work. As it happens, it is how things have been working, though. We've granted freeze exceptions for GNOME megaupdates for many of the last several releases (I can go back and get precise numbers if you like). Notably, I can't recall a single instance where they broke the world. This is not something I can say about a lot of packages, so I think the desktop team deserves some credit and trust for that. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 04:47:32PM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: > I'd be open to a "shortcut" version of the Change process that > essentially says "hey, we're doing this again". But this way we'd get > visibility across teams and externally. For better or for worse, our > Change list is a starting point for marketing and PR, so it's > beneficial to have these sorts of things visible externally, too. The self-contained changes _should_ basically serve as "shortcuts", but it does seem like there are a number of these "new version of X" changes that could benefit from an even more short version, including one-time FESCo approval rather than needing to be re-upped as long as nothing significant changes? -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 1:50 PM Matthew Miller wrote: > We used to always have a Change submitted for the GNOME update, but that > stopped, I assume because it felt like kind of rote bureaucracy rather than > helpful, since it was basically the same every time. Maybe it's useful after > all to help keep communications open for situations like this? > It may come as no surprise given my role, but I'm in favor of continuing to submit Change proposals for GNOME updates and similar. I'd be open to a "shortcut" version of the Change process that essentially says "hey, we're doing this again". But this way we'd get visibility across teams and externally. For better or for worse, our Change list is a starting point for marketing and PR, so it's beneficial to have these sorts of things visible externally, too. -- Ben Cotton Fedora Program Manager TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 9:04 AM, Kalev Lember wrote: > Dunno what to do wrt the ongoing freeze and getting final 3.30 in F29 > Beta, I guess it may be too late for that. Any opinions from QA here? If 3.29 is not what GNOME folks had ever wanted to ship in the Beta, why are we hearing about it one week before go/nogo? The schedule has been published for what, 9 months? *shrug* I do not like the idea that it is a QA decision to enforce or relax the schedule. This isn't what freeze exception is intended for. It's intended for abrasive, ugly, or annoying bugs, that simply do not qualify as release blocking and the fix for which is unlikely to itself become a blocker. There is no information presented for QA to even assess this question as it stands. The next blocker and freeze exception review is on Monday. We cannot even get a release candidate until all known blockers are cleared. The earliest we likely see any kind of compose with 3.30 would be maybe 1800UTC on Tuesday? Haha! Not even two days of testing? That's comical. My opinion, since there are few facts to go on to overcome the burden stated in a written process and schedule for some time, is -1 FE. If it was important enough to get 3.30 on actual Beta installation media, it needed to be done before freeze. Not depend on a freeze exception. That is definitely not how things are supposed to work. -- Chris Murphy ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 05:04:46PM +0200, Kalev Lember wrote: > We are quite a bit behind with the builds, like half of GNOME is still > at 3.28.x or at various stages of 3.29.x snapshots, so there's quite a > bit of catching up to do. We used to always have a Change submitted for the GNOME update, but that stopped, I assume because it felt like kind of rote bureaucracy rather than helpful, since it was basically the same every time. Maybe it's useful after all to help keep communications open for situations like this? -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 12:56 PM Tomasz Torcz wrote: > On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 10:15:26PM +0530, Parag Nemade wrote: > > > > > > I'd be *strongly* disinclined to give a Freeze Exception for a GNOME > > > mega-update. There's just far too much that could go wrong. Please > plan to > > > land the mega-update in updates-testing once the Freeze lifts. U-T is > > > enabled by default on the Beta, so people will pick it up on their > first > > > post-install update anyway. > > > > > > > > > > Please don't stop this update. There will be few required fixes in this > > megaupdate which we need early to test. > > Can you get exceptions for specific packages fixing specific bugs? > Of course, that's what the Freeze Exception process is for. Propose a bug as a blocker or freeze exception using https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/propose_bug Now, let's talk frankly about what a "freeze" is, because I think that a lot of people on this thread don't understand what it means. A freeze (in Fedora parlance) means that we stop pushing Bodhi updates to the stable "fedora" repository for a few weeks while we stabilize a Beta or GA release. The freeze dates are clearly announced at the start of each Fedora cycle (usually just after the previous release branches off). In the case of Fedora 29, those dates could be found at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/29/Schedule Once we enter Freeze, we only allow changes in that fix bugs declared to be Blockers or Freeze Exceptions. Blockers are fairly obvious: if the bug causes Fedora to fail one or more blocking release criteria, it's a blocker bug. Freeze Exceptions have slightly slushier rules, but they generally amount to this: "In general, freeze exception bugs are usually bugs for which an update is not an optimal solution, and for which the fix is reasonably small and testable (this consideration becomes progressively more important as a release nears, so bugs may be downgraded from freeze exception status late in the release process if it transpires that the fix is complex and hard to test)." Rebasing an entire desktop environment is *not* a small change. It is likely to introduce new blocking issues and is (to my mind) an unreasonable request at this stage of the process. I can be overruled on this (I'm only one vote on the Blocker/FE process crew), but I don't think it's wise to do this more than a week into a Freeze. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
On Wed, 2018-09-05 at 11:19 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 11:12 AM Kalev Lember wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > As many of you know, I've been gone half the summer. I'm back now since > > Monday though and just in time for GNOME 3.30.0 :) > > > > We are quite a bit behind with the builds, like half of GNOME is still > > at 3.28.x or at various stages of 3.29.x snapshots, so there's quite a > > bit of catching up to do. > > > > I just requested a f29-gnome side tag and will be commencing 3.30.0 > > builds shortly. When the builds are done, I'll try to collect all the > > builds in a single Bodhi megaupdate as usual. Please use 'fedpkg build > > --target f29-gnome' if you are helping with builds, and I'll pick up > > anything that is tagged with f29-gnome in koji. > > > > Dunno what to do wrt the ongoing freeze and getting final 3.30 in F29 > > Beta, I guess it may be too late for that. Any opinions from QA here? > > > > There's also a few 3.30.0 builds already submitted separately into > > Bodhi. I may try to collect those to the megaupdate as well, not sure > > yet. Let's see how things go :) > > > > > > I'd be *strongly* disinclined to give a Freeze Exception for a GNOME > mega-update. There's just far too much that could go wrong. Please plan to > land the mega-update in updates-testing once the Freeze lifts. U-T is > enabled by default on the Beta, so people will pick it up on their first > post-install update anyway. There is no need to wait "for the Freeze [to] lift" to land this or any update in updates-testing. The freeze applies only to the 'stable' repository: the freeze prevents packages being moved *from* updates- testing to 'stable' (without approval via FE/blocker process). Packages can be submitted to, and land in, updates-testing at any time throughout the cycle. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
On Wed, 2018-09-05 at 22:15 +0530, Parag Nemade wrote: > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 8:49 PM, Stephen Gallagher > wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 11:12 AM Kalev Lember > > wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > As many of you know, I've been gone half the summer. I'm back now since > > > Monday though and just in time for GNOME 3.30.0 :) > > > > > > We are quite a bit behind with the builds, like half of GNOME is still > > > at 3.28.x or at various stages of 3.29.x snapshots, so there's quite a > > > bit of catching up to do. > > > > > > I just requested a f29-gnome side tag and will be commencing 3.30.0 > > > builds shortly. When the builds are done, I'll try to collect all the > > > builds in a single Bodhi megaupdate as usual. Please use 'fedpkg build > > > --target f29-gnome' if you are helping with builds, and I'll pick up > > > anything that is tagged with f29-gnome in koji. > > > > > > Dunno what to do wrt the ongoing freeze and getting final 3.30 in F29 > > > Beta, I guess it may be too late for that. Any opinions from QA here? > > > > > > There's also a few 3.30.0 builds already submitted separately into > > > Bodhi. I may try to collect those to the megaupdate as well, not sure > > > yet. Let's see how things go :) > > > > > > > > > > I'd be *strongly* disinclined to give a Freeze Exception for a GNOME > > mega-update. There's just far too much that could go wrong. Please plan to > > land the mega-update in updates-testing once the Freeze lifts. U-T is > > enabled by default on the Beta, so people will pick it up on their first > > post-install update anyway. > > > > > > Please don't stop this update. There will be few required fixes in this > megaupdate which we need early to test. There is a precedent for accepting this kind of update during freeze, but GNOME is usually in a more organized state to start with (i.e. we're usually going from something like an organized set of .91 builds to an organized set of .0 builds), so I suspect the danger of destabilizing the Beta is slightly higher. The earlier the update can be put together, the less unhappy I'd be to accept it wholesale through the freeze. Note that Go/No-Go is scheduled for next Thursday. To make sure everyone's on the same page, if we do *not* accept the update for the Beta, then by default those who install the Beta will get it on their first system update after installing (as updates- testing is enabled by default for pre-releases). Thus it will still certainly be testable. The decision to be made is basically "do the benefits of having the 3.30.0 builds actually in the Beta, in terms of making the live image and first boot environment work better, outweigh the risks that they will somehow cause issues for the compose process or contain undetected critical bugs worse than those in the current builds". The more runway we have to test the compose process and the composed artifacts, the happier I'd be with saying the benefits will likely outweigh the drawbacks. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 10:15:26PM +0530, Parag Nemade wrote: > > > > I'd be *strongly* disinclined to give a Freeze Exception for a GNOME > > mega-update. There's just far too much that could go wrong. Please plan to > > land the mega-update in updates-testing once the Freeze lifts. U-T is > > enabled by default on the Beta, so people will pick it up on their first > > post-install update anyway. > > > > > > Please don't stop this update. There will be few required fixes in this > megaupdate which we need early to test. Can you get exceptions for specific packages fixing specific bugs? -- Tomasz Torcz RIP is irrevelant. Spoofing is futile. xmpp: zdzich...@chrome.pl Your routes will be aggreggated. -- Alex Yuriev ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 8:49 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 11:12 AM Kalev Lember > wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> As many of you know, I've been gone half the summer. I'm back now since >> Monday though and just in time for GNOME 3.30.0 :) >> >> We are quite a bit behind with the builds, like half of GNOME is still >> at 3.28.x or at various stages of 3.29.x snapshots, so there's quite a >> bit of catching up to do. >> >> I just requested a f29-gnome side tag and will be commencing 3.30.0 >> builds shortly. When the builds are done, I'll try to collect all the >> builds in a single Bodhi megaupdate as usual. Please use 'fedpkg build >> --target f29-gnome' if you are helping with builds, and I'll pick up >> anything that is tagged with f29-gnome in koji. >> >> Dunno what to do wrt the ongoing freeze and getting final 3.30 in F29 >> Beta, I guess it may be too late for that. Any opinions from QA here? >> >> There's also a few 3.30.0 builds already submitted separately into >> Bodhi. I may try to collect those to the megaupdate as well, not sure >> yet. Let's see how things go :) >> >> > > I'd be *strongly* disinclined to give a Freeze Exception for a GNOME > mega-update. There's just far too much that could go wrong. Please plan to > land the mega-update in updates-testing once the Freeze lifts. U-T is > enabled by default on the Beta, so people will pick it up on their first > post-install update anyway. > > Please don't stop this update. There will be few required fixes in this megaupdate which we need early to test. Parag. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
>> As many of you know, I've been gone half the summer. I'm back now since >> Monday though and just in time for GNOME 3.30.0 :) >> >> We are quite a bit behind with the builds, like half of GNOME is still >> at 3.28.x or at various stages of 3.29.x snapshots, so there's quite a >> bit of catching up to do. >> >> I just requested a f29-gnome side tag and will be commencing 3.30.0 >> builds shortly. When the builds are done, I'll try to collect all the >> builds in a single Bodhi megaupdate as usual. Please use 'fedpkg build >> --target f29-gnome' if you are helping with builds, and I'll pick up >> anything that is tagged with f29-gnome in koji. >> >> Dunno what to do wrt the ongoing freeze and getting final 3.30 in F29 >> Beta, I guess it may be too late for that. Any opinions from QA here? >> >> There's also a few 3.30.0 builds already submitted separately into >> Bodhi. I may try to collect those to the megaupdate as well, not sure >> yet. Let's see how things go :) >> > > > I'd be *strongly* disinclined to give a Freeze Exception for a GNOME > mega-update. There's just far too much that could go wrong. Please plan to > land the mega-update in updates-testing once the Freeze lifts. U-T is enabled > by default on the Beta, so people will pick it up on their first post-install > update anyway. Ultimately by declining it now all we're doing is pushing out the pain, if any, to post beta which IMO is even worse given we're then deferring it to GA freeze which is even worse! Also there has been a precedent in the past for putting this in, whether that is right or not I have no opinion. Peter ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 at 16:19, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > I'd be *strongly* disinclined to give a Freeze Exception for a GNOME > mega-update. So you'd rather we ship GA with early pre-release builds of GNOME that have had little-to-no testing? From a downstream point of view I'm not going to fix things found by Fedora QA in 3.29.4 when a stable 3.30.0 exists with those fixes. Richard. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: GNOME 3.30.0 megaupdate
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 11:12 AM Kalev Lember wrote: > Hi all, > > As many of you know, I've been gone half the summer. I'm back now since > Monday though and just in time for GNOME 3.30.0 :) > > We are quite a bit behind with the builds, like half of GNOME is still > at 3.28.x or at various stages of 3.29.x snapshots, so there's quite a > bit of catching up to do. > > I just requested a f29-gnome side tag and will be commencing 3.30.0 > builds shortly. When the builds are done, I'll try to collect all the > builds in a single Bodhi megaupdate as usual. Please use 'fedpkg build > --target f29-gnome' if you are helping with builds, and I'll pick up > anything that is tagged with f29-gnome in koji. > > Dunno what to do wrt the ongoing freeze and getting final 3.30 in F29 > Beta, I guess it may be too late for that. Any opinions from QA here? > > There's also a few 3.30.0 builds already submitted separately into > Bodhi. I may try to collect those to the megaupdate as well, not sure > yet. Let's see how things go :) > > I'd be *strongly* disinclined to give a Freeze Exception for a GNOME mega-update. There's just far too much that could go wrong. Please plan to land the mega-update in updates-testing once the Freeze lifts. U-T is enabled by default on the Beta, so people will pick it up on their first post-install update anyway. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
