On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 10:23 AM, Harald Sitter <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 4:50 AM, Scott Kitterman <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Tuesday, March 03, 2015 08:25:09 PM Aleix Pol wrote: >>> Hi, >>> I was looking into some functionality and just realized kubuntu >>> doesn't provide an apt-listbugs executable, that was introduced for >>> better integration with Debian. >>> >>> Anybody here knows what's the status on it? >>> I'll change some code so it's still possible to use without >>> apt-listbugs for now, but I wonder if it should become a dependency on >>> Kubuntu as well. >>> >>> Aleix >> >> It was removed in 2008: >> >> Removal requested on 2008-10-14. >> Debian specific, never worked for Ubuntu, #271314 >> >> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt-listbugs/+publishinghistory > > I did not even know that was a thing. > > tldr: I don't think this sort of feature makes any sense in a Kubuntu > or Ubuntu context because we have automatic QA and testing > requirements and policies to not run into this sort of problem to > begin. > > > Description: > apt-listbugs is a tool which retrieves bug reports from the Debian Bug > Tracking System and lists them. Especially, it is intended to be > invoked before each installation/upgrade by APT in order to check > whether the installation/upgrade is safe. > > This is particularly to help unstable users not blow up their system. > > Now then. One could probably write a launchpad based replacement for > that (alas, right now I don't think one can query specifically for > bugs in one source package). BUT I do wonder whether this would make > any sense for us considering we have automatism and QA measures in > place behind the scenes that Debian unstable does not have. If we > wanted to compare one of our archive with Debian unstable it would be > more or less $devseries-proposed which really only has the > requirements of being able to build and being free software having > made it past the archive admins. And $devseries-proposed is very much > not supported anyway. The main $devseries archive meanwhile already > has quite a bit of additional QA applied onto it (autopkgtest, > britney, possibly something else I don't know about) ruling out the > majority of showstopper problems (mind you, kubuntu ci even reduces > the risk of file conflicts ;)). Other than that $devseries is mostly > only breaking on migrational stuff which I don't think are handled in > critical severity bug reports (thus wouldn't show up in a apt-listbugs > tool). > > So, I find it doubtable to have use for it in $devseries. > > For $stableseries it becomes even less relevant because of the >=1 > week proposed testing, automatic crash reporting, update phasing and > so on and so forth. Granted, if something breaks so horribly that a > critical bug gets created for it we'd likely want to halt upgrades. > The chances of that happening for something that is truly critical are > incredibly slim however. And should it happen all the same I think > there's archive trickery one could pull off (e.g. set update phasing > to 0 to prevent the GUI updaters from actually seeing the package). > > Not really worth putting engineering force behind. In particular since > I really can't find launchpad api to conveniently query bugs with a > suitably restrictive filter to not have it take 300 hours. > > HS > > -- > kubuntu-devel mailing list > [email protected] > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
In the end I decided to just drop the support for it. It was not working well anyway and needed love. Also it's not really providing text one would want to show a user anyway... Thanks for the feedback guys! Aleix -- kubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
