Re: What to do about packaging beta, or rc as alternate installable

2014-01-23 Thread Kevin Kofler 
Christopher Meng wrote:
 But you can do this on copr IMO.  Also update-testing is not just a place
 for updates to have a break, you can let it satisfy the needs of testing
 for unstable.

Well, that's kinda abusing updates-testing. IMHO, COPR is the much better 
option until you have something reasonably close to going stable.

Kevin Kofler

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: What to do about packaging beta, or rc as alternate installable

2014-01-23 Thread Stephen Gallagher 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 01/23/2014 01:43 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
 Christopher Meng wrote:
 But you can do this on copr IMO.  Also update-testing is not just
 a place for updates to have a break, you can let it satisfy the
 needs of testing for unstable.
 
 Well, that's kinda abusing updates-testing. IMHO, COPR is the much
 better option until you have something reasonably close to going
 stable.
 

The other problem with using updates-testing in this way is that it
makes it more difficult if you have to deliver a real bug or security
fix to stable. Now you have to unpush your testing version, mangle
your git history, file a new update ...


I agree with Kevin that this is pretty much exactly what COPR is good
at (and what I'm using it for myself[1]).

1) http://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/sgallagh/ReviewBoard2/

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlLhd8QACgkQeiVVYja6o6N1WgCgqGU51RjTv4/uizYPOV5HSBhE
WFkAoLAl4Twg3iHIBgEx1O5++juLlaXH
=rNyt
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: What to do about packaging beta, or rc as alternate installable

2014-01-23 Thread Adam Williamson 
On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 19:43 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
 Christopher Meng wrote:
  But you can do this on copr IMO.  Also update-testing is not just a place
  for updates to have a break, you can let it satisfy the needs of testing
  for unstable.
 
 Well, that's kinda abusing updates-testing. IMHO, COPR is the much better 
 option until you have something reasonably close to going stable.

It's not just kinda abusing updates-testing, *it is abusing
updates-testing*. updates-testing has a specific and explicitly
specified purpose: to test updates before they go to -stable. That is
all that it is for. Anything in updates-testing must be something that
the maintainer expects to submit to stable once testing has indicated
that it works correctly.
-- 
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
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: What to do about packaging beta, or rc as alternate installable

2014-01-23 Thread Adam Williamson 
On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 15:11 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
 On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 19:43 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
  Christopher Meng wrote:
   But you can do this on copr IMO.  Also update-testing is not just a place
   for updates to have a break, you can let it satisfy the needs of testing
   for unstable.
  
  Well, that's kinda abusing updates-testing. IMHO, COPR is the much better 
  option until you have something reasonably close to going stable.
 
 It's not just kinda abusing updates-testing, *it is abusing
 updates-testing*. updates-testing has a specific and explicitly
 specified purpose: to test updates before they go to -stable. That is
 all that it is for. Anything in updates-testing must be something that
 the maintainer expects to submit to stable once testing has indicated
 that it works correctly.

In other words: Christopher, if you're currently doing this, please move
the packages to a COPR or other venue more appropriate for this purpose,
and stop doing it.
-- 
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
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: What to do about packaging beta, or rc as alternate installable

2014-01-23 Thread Christopher Meng 
On Jan 24, 2014 7:14 AM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:

 In other words: Christopher, if you're currently doing this, please move
 the packages to a COPR or other venue more appropriate for this purpose,
 and stop doing it.

No absolutely not. I don't have any thing *unstable*. Something unstable
are pushed to Archlinux AUR first. XD
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: What to do about packaging beta, or rc as alternate installable

2014-01-23 Thread Pete Travis 
On Jan 23, 2014 1:12 PM, Stephen Gallagher sgall...@redhat.com wrote:

 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
 Hash: SHA1

 On 01/23/2014 01:43 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
  Christopher Meng wrote:
  But you can do this on copr IMO.  Also update-testing is not just
  a place for updates to have a break, you can let it satisfy the
  needs of testing for unstable.
 
  Well, that's kinda abusing updates-testing. IMHO, COPR is the much
  better option until you have something reasonably close to going
  stable.
 

 The other problem with using updates-testing in this way is that it
 makes it more difficult if you have to deliver a real bug or security
 fix to stable. Now you have to unpush your testing version, mangle
 your git history, file a new update ...


 I agree with Kevin that this is pretty much exactly what COPR is good
 at (and what I'm using it for myself[1]).

 1) http://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/sgallagh/ReviewBoard2/

 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
 Version: GnuPG v1
 Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

 iEYEARECAAYFAlLhd8QACgkQeiVVYja6o6N1WgCgqGU51RjTv4/uizYPOV5HSBhE
 WFkAoLAl4Twg3iHIBgEx1O5++juLlaXH
 =rNyt
 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
 --

Is there something inherent to COPRs that solves the problem of duplicate
paths, ie /usr/bin/mercurial from two different sources?

If I missed something, a link with an appropriate measure of mocking would
be welcome.

--Pete
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: What to do about packaging beta, or rc as alternate installable

2014-01-23 Thread Adam Williamson 
On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 19:19 -0700, Pete Travis wrote:

 Is there something inherent to COPRs that solves the problem of
 duplicate paths, ie /usr/bin/mercurial from two different sources?
 
 If I missed something, a link with an appropriate measure of mocking
 would be welcome.

Not AFAIK. If you want your test package to be parallel installable,
you'd have to do the usual work of changing its install location or
prefixing/suffixing its names or whatever.
-- 
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
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: What to do about packaging beta, or rc as alternate installable

2014-01-22 Thread Richard W.M. Jones 
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 07:33:40PM -0500, Neal Becker wrote:
 One of the packages I maintain is mercurial.  Frequently (e.g., now), there
 is a rc version available for test.  It will probably break some other package
 that depends on it.
 
 I am thinking of a model like google uses for chrome.  I could install any of:
 
 google-chrome-{stable,beta,unstable}
 
 I don't think fedora uses this model anywhere.  AFAICT, in Fedora there is 
 always only 1 version available - although there could be one in updates-
 testing.  But the purpose of updates-testing is now for a long-lived parallel
 development - it is designed for short term before promotion to stable.
 
 Although the google-chrome model is perhaps not the ideal way to handle the
 idea of alternative versions - it seems good enough.
 
 Any thoughts?

virt-preview is another model you might look at.

Some time (hopefully soon) we'll be building virt-preview using copr,
but for the time being you can read about it here:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Virtualization_Preview_Repository

Rich.

-- 
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
virt-df lists disk usage of guests without needing to install any
software inside the virtual machine.  Supports Linux and Windows.
http://people.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-df/
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: What to do about packaging beta, or rc as alternate installable

2014-01-21 Thread Josh Boyer 
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 7:33 PM, Neal Becker ndbeck...@gmail.com wrote:
 One of the packages I maintain is mercurial.  Frequently (e.g., now), there
 is a rc version available for test.  It will probably break some other package
 that depends on it.

 I am thinking of a model like google uses for chrome.  I could install any of:

 google-chrome-{stable,beta,unstable}

 I don't think fedora uses this model anywhere.  AFAICT, in Fedora there is
 always only 1 version available - although there could be one in updates-
 testing.  But the purpose of updates-testing is now for a long-lived parallel
 development - it is designed for short term before promotion to stable.

 Although the google-chrome model is perhaps not the ideal way to handle the
 idea of alternative versions - it seems good enough.

 Any thoughts?

You could provide it in a copr.  That is what e.g. Ryan Lerch does
with unreleased builds of his corebird package.

http://copr.fedoraproject.org/

josh
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: What to do about packaging beta, or rc as alternate installable

2014-01-21 Thread Christopher Meng 
Seriously, it's harmful to provide unstable packages to users.

And I don't think Fedora has a long term support.
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: What to do about packaging beta, or rc as alternate installable

2014-01-21 Thread Mauricio Tavares 
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 8:58 PM, Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com wrote:
 Seriously, it's harmful to provide unstable packages to users.

  Still, it makes sense to have a place to beta test either the
package or the packaging (how to create a proper package?) itself.

 And I don't think Fedora has a long term support.


 --
 devel mailing list
 devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: What to do about packaging beta, or rc as alternate installable

2014-01-21 Thread Adam Williamson 
On Tue, 2014-01-21 at 21:03 -0500, Mauricio Tavares wrote:
 On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 8:58 PM, Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com wrote:
  Seriously, it's harmful to provide unstable packages to users.
 
   Still, it makes sense to have a place to beta test either the
 package or the packaging (how to create a proper package?) itself.

That would be an ideal use for a copr or fedorapeople repo.
-- 
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
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: What to do about packaging beta, or rc as alternate installable

2014-01-21 Thread Christopher Meng 
On Jan 22, 2014 10:03 AM, Mauricio Tavares raubvo...@gmail.com wrote:
   Still, it makes sense to have a place to beta test either the
 package or the packaging (how to create a proper package?) itself.

It's hard to say how to create a proper package testing in one slot of
pkgdb. Also it may be a burden when you don't have enough time to
contribute.

But you can do this on copr IMO.  Also update-testing is not just a place
for updates to have a break, you can let it satisfy the needs of testing
for unstable.
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: What to do about packaging beta, or rc as alternate installable

2014-01-21 Thread Adam Williamson 
On Tue, 2014-01-21 at 19:33 -0500, Neal Becker wrote:
 One of the packages I maintain is mercurial.  Frequently (e.g., now), there
 is a rc version available for test.  It will probably break some other package
 that depends on it.
 
 I am thinking of a model like google uses for chrome.  I could install any of:
 
 google-chrome-{stable,beta,unstable}
 
 I don't think fedora uses this model anywhere.  AFAICT, in Fedora there is 
 always only 1 version available - although there could be one in updates-
 testing.

Just for the record, of course we can have multiple different packages
that contain different versions of the same source. This is permitted in
specific situations, but generally frowned upon: details are in the
guidelines. It's most commonly used to provide multiple versions of
libraries where we really want to have packages that depend on different
versions of the library.
-- 
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
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct