Re: Karma threshold for kernel
On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 13:29:23 -0600, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > u...@radiopresenter.me.uk (unauthenticated) - 2010-03-08 13:36:44 (karma: 0) > Error Type: Error Value: Error getting > repository data for installed, repository not foundFile : > /usr/share/PackageKit/helpers/yum/yumBackend.py, line 3125, in > main()File : /usr/share/PackageKit/helpers/yum/yumBackend.py, line > 3122, in You've modified the email address. The correct one is visible in bodhi. It could be that it really is Paul West who runs radiopresenter.me.uk I've mailed to his address to ask about these messages. Has anyone else tried that before? -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Karma threshold for kernel
On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 13:29:23 -0600, Michael wrote: > Michael Schwendt wrote: > > Nah. The same way you could consider all bodhi comments "spam". If you > > are the first commenter of a popular package, you receive lots of > > notifications for all subsequent comments (where sometimes people > > even use bodhi to argue about something). > > Michael, how is posting: > > u...@radiopresenter.me.uk (unauthenticated) - 2010-03-08 13:36:44 (karma: 0) > Error Type: Error Value: Error getting > repository data for installed, repository not foundFile : > /usr/share/PackageKit/helpers/yum/yumBackend.py, line 3125, in > main()File : /usr/share/PackageKit/helpers/yum/yumBackend.py, line > 3122, in > main backend.dispatcher(sys.argv[1:])File : > /usr/lib/python2.6/site- > packages/packagekit/backend.py, line 710, in dispatcher > self.dispatch_command(args[0], args[1:])File : /usr/lib/python2.6/site- > packages/packagekit/backend.py, line 657, in dispatch_command > self.update_packages(only_trusted, package_ids)File : > /usr/share/PackageKit/helpers/yum/yumBackend.py, line 1948, in > update_packages > signed = self._is_package_repo_signed(pkg)File : > /usr/share/PackageKit/helpers/yum/yumBackend.py, line 1437, in > _is_package_repo_signed repo = self.yumbase.repos.getRepo(pkg.repoid) > File : /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/yum/repos.py, line 121, in getRepo > 'Error getting repository data for $s, repository not found' $ (repoid) > > Multiple times a week not considered spam? Really? Posting this prior to > stable pushes is fine -- I never consider it spam. It's a clueless user, who abuses bodhi's features to post anonymous comments. Just turn off that feature, and let people register for either a Fedora account or a Fedora Bodhi account. Then it would be possible to take further action. > If I could CC you on > some of those updates maybe you would change your opinion. Are you kidding? It would only influence my opinion about you. I've been subscribed to enough bodhi tickets before. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Karma threshold for kernel
Michael Schwendt wrote: > Nah. The same way you could consider all bodhi comments "spam". If you > are the first commenter of a popular package, you receive lots of > notifications for all subsequent comments (where sometimes people > even use bodhi to argue about something). Michael, how is posting: u...@radiopresenter.me.uk (unauthenticated) - 2010-03-08 13:36:44 (karma: 0) Error Type: Error Value: Error getting repository data for installed, repository not foundFile : /usr/share/PackageKit/helpers/yum/yumBackend.py, line 3125, in main()File : /usr/share/PackageKit/helpers/yum/yumBackend.py, line 3122, in main backend.dispatcher(sys.argv[1:])File : /usr/lib/python2.6/site- packages/packagekit/backend.py, line 710, in dispatcher self.dispatch_command(args[0], args[1:])File : /usr/lib/python2.6/site- packages/packagekit/backend.py, line 657, in dispatch_command self.update_packages(only_trusted, package_ids)File : /usr/share/PackageKit/helpers/yum/yumBackend.py, line 1948, in update_packages signed = self._is_package_repo_signed(pkg)File : /usr/share/PackageKit/helpers/yum/yumBackend.py, line 1437, in _is_package_repo_signed repo = self.yumbase.repos.getRepo(pkg.repoid) File : /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/yum/repos.py, line 121, in getRepo 'Error getting repository data for $s, repository not found' $ (repoid) Multiple times a week not considered spam? Really? Posting this prior to stable pushes is fine -- I never consider it spam. If I could CC you on some of those updates maybe you would change your opinion. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Karma threshold for kernel
On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 10:07:05 -0500, Josh wrote: > On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 08:55:34AM -0600, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > >Josh Boyer wrote: > >> 2) Karma after it goes to stable is good for informational purposes, but it > >> will not cause an update to get removed from Stable. We don't back out > >> updates > >> after that are pushed stable except in very rare cases. > > > > > >I'll ask again: > > > >Why does bodhi accept karma or comments after the stable push has been > >made? Because it can be useful to comment on the testing _all_ previous karma submitters have done. Please keep stable update tickets open for further comments. > It just causes email spam. Nah. The same way you could consider all bodhi comments "spam". If you are the first commenter of a popular package, you receive lots of notifications for all subsequent comments (where sometimes people even use bodhi to argue about something). -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Karma threshold for kernel
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 08:55:34AM -0600, Michael Cronenworth wrote: >Josh Boyer wrote: >> 2) Karma after it goes to stable is good for informational purposes, but it >> will not cause an update to get removed from Stable. We don't back out >> updates >> after that are pushed stable except in very rare cases. > > >I'll ask again: > >Why does bodhi accept karma or comments after the stable push has been >made? It just causes email spam. There's one guy who has been submitted >the same bogus comment and negative karma for abrt for the past week. An >abrt update that has long since been pushed. I see it happen every time >for the kernel updates as well. Because nobody has fixed: https://fedorahosted.org/bodhi/ticket/358 https://fedorahosted.org/bodhi/ticket/185 Patches for those would be very welcome I think. josh -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Karma threshold for kernel
Josh Boyer wrote: > 2) Karma after it goes to stable is good for informational purposes, but it > will not cause an update to get removed from Stable. We don't back out > updates > after that are pushed stable except in very rare cases. I'll ask again: Why does bodhi accept karma or comments after the stable push has been made? It just causes email spam. There's one guy who has been submitted the same bogus comment and negative karma for abrt for the past week. An abrt update that has long since been pushed. I see it happen every time for the kernel updates as well. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Karma threshold for kernel
On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 2:00 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 01:36:18PM +0100, Thomas Janssen wrote: >>Hi, >> >>what kind of karma threshold is set for the kernel? >> >>The page in bodhi says it has a karma of 9, but if you count it, it's >>13+ and 10- >> >>And the kernel got -5 since it's pushed to stable. Shouldn't that one >>stay out of stable for now? > > 1) Anonymous karma doesn't count towards the karma totals. Ah, got it, thanks. > 2) Karma after it goes to stable is good for informational purposes, but it > will not cause an update to get removed from Stable. We don't back out > updates > after that are pushed stable except in very rare cases. Stupid me. I thought it's not yet in stable. -- LG Thomas Dubium sapientiae initium -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Karma threshold for kernel
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 01:36:18PM +0100, Thomas Janssen wrote: >Hi, > >what kind of karma threshold is set for the kernel? > >The page in bodhi says it has a karma of 9, but if you count it, it's >13+ and 10- > >And the kernel got -5 since it's pushed to stable. Shouldn't that one >stay out of stable for now? 1) Anonymous karma doesn't count towards the karma totals. 2) Karma after it goes to stable is good for informational purposes, but it will not cause an update to get removed from Stable. We don't back out updates after that are pushed stable except in very rare cases. josh -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Karma threshold for kernel
Hi, what kind of karma threshold is set for the kernel? The page in bodhi says it has a karma of 9, but if you count it, it's 13+ and 10- And the kernel got -5 since it's pushed to stable. Shouldn't that one stay out of stable for now? https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/kernel-2.6.32.9-67.fc12 I'm running 2.6.32.9-70 meanwhile from updates-testing. -- LG Thomas Dubium sapientiae initium -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
