subject:"thunderbird upgrade \- wtf\?"


On 10/14/2009 08:21 AM, Steve Dickson wrote:

On 10/13/2009 09:56 AM, Christopher Aillon wrote:


Not everyone had issues with the indexing so that seemed to slip past
testing.  It was a change, but didn't seem to disrupt things, so we let
it slide.

Not to pile on, believe me I know painful change is... 8-) but...

This new indexing is the biggest pain of all the changes IMHO...
My laptop CPU start to and continues to be pegged when I start up and
shut down TB3b... I could not read mail for 24hrs due to TPB3 trying
to indexing all my mail... Granted I have a ton of mail, in large number
of folders...  but my CPU became pegged, TPB3 start to eat all the memory,
causing everything to be swapped out, which caused the system to finally hang!!
This was happen continuously. So I figured the only way to get by this was to
delete mail... Which became a race between me deleting mail and TB3b try
to index that folder...  I have a feeling that scenario was not tested
too well... ;-)

So for you to say indexing didn't seem to disrupt things is simply
inaccurate... It was a major disruption and a complete waste of time...


Agreed.

Or put more simply, this bug fix update dropped an unexpected, 2+ 
gigabyte turd into my NFS-mounted home directory



[jgar...@bd ~]$ ls -l ~/.thunderbird/tc8ktlwu.default/global-messages-db.sqlite
-rw-r--r-- 1 jgarzik jgarzik 2731515904 2009-10-14 08:42 
/g/g/.thunderbird/tc8ktlwu.default/global-messages-db.sqlite


as well as slowing down all my NFS accesses for ~24 hours.

I hope a thunderbird update is being prepared, to make 2 config tweaks 
for F11?


And a warning / release note for F12 users, noting that a __lot__ of 
additional disk space is required in ~/.thunderbird.


Jeff



--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

Rahul Sundaram sundaram at fedoraproject.org writes:

  problems was known then reversing the release was not really an option.
 
 Why not? The maintainer says it is a option and it is definitely
 feasible to release a update that disables these couple of features by
 default rather than make everybody go through the same problems. I don't
 understand your view point at all.  Changelog or even testing notes is
 useful to guide testers into checking for problems but once the problems
 are evident, we should just address them directly. Only a tiny fraction
 of our users will read such notes and it is not reasonable to expect
 them to continue to suffer.

Yes if it is an option to release a new package update that will have smart
folders and GLODA turned off then great - however I presume that the significant
majority of F11 users will already have updated and therefore already have been
hit by the change - so have either gone through the pain and reset their
parameters by now or dumped TB in favour of another mail client.  Therefore the
gain of a new update will (to me) seem not provide much in the way of help now
that the damage (of the beta4) has already been done.

I guess that 3.0pre is not far away, and perhaps in this next update the smart
folders and GLODA can be off by default.  I must admit that I would also like to
see the normal icons unchanged on the top taskbar in TB - I simply re-instated
what I want, but I would have preferred that the update did not take them away
in the first place.  Again I have made the changes necessary to get 3.0b4
working nicely (there are some residual bugs though - like occasionally the
compose window gets its formatting slightly awry and won't send and restarting
TB then fixes it)

Anyway hopefully this event will inform how the next update gets planned so that
it does not upset as many people next time?


-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

Jeff Garzik jgarzik at pobox.com writes:

 I hope a thunderbird update is being prepared, to make 2 config tweaks 
 for F11?
 
 And a warning / release note for F12 users, noting that a __lot__ of 
 additional disk space is required in ~/.thunderbird.
 
   Jeff

Hopefully the default will be GLODA=off and smart folders=off and then the
additional humungous file space requirements will not be needed and the user
presentation a lot more familiar as well as functional?

I must admit I cannot imagine why the thunderbird developers wanted the global
indexing thing in the first place - I, like many others, keep mail accounts
separate for a good reason - and I don't want a global search - it is insane -
and I also don't want to munge my inboxes together - I keep work and private
mail as well as other accounts separate so they there is no mixing and merging.

Hopefully f12 TB will arrive and function smoothly (hands clasped together, eyes
looking upward, channelling all the power of prayer..and hoping the
developers are listening!)

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-14 Thread Rahul Sundaram

On 10/14/2009 07:39 PM, Mike Cloaked wrote:

 
 Yes if it is an option to release a new package update that will have smart
 folders and GLODA turned off then great - however I presume that the 
 significant
 majority of F11 users will already have updated and therefore already have 
 been
 hit by the change - so have either gone through the pain and reset their
 parameters by now or dumped TB in favour of another mail client. 

Not sure there is any basis for that claim since we don't collect
detailed stats on how frequent Fedora users do update but a problem of
this nature is known, it is better to resolve it quickly rather than
assume that everybody has already learned to cope up with it. Anyway,
this debate is essentially over at this point since a update with the
defaults changed is being pushed out.

http://mether.wordpress.com/2009/10/14/thunderbird-problem-gets-fixed/

Rahul

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

Rahul Sundaram sundaram at fedoraproject.org writes:

 Anyway,
 this debate is essentially over at this point since a update with the
 defaults changed is being pushed out.
 
 http://mether.wordpress.com/2009/10/14/thunderbird-problem-gets-fixed/
 
 Rahul
 

OK - I hope this runs smoothly and hopefully we all learned from this event
(just like the d-bus event!)

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-14 Thread Jesse Keating

On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 09:37 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
 On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Jesse Keating wrote:
 
  On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 09:27 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
  
   The problem isn't GLODA and smart folders, it's that we have no process in
   place to identify and deal with problems like this before it's too late.
 
  Aside from updates-testing you mean, where people can test potential
  updates and give feedback as to how they work on their systems?
 
 
 Fat lot of good it's doing.
 
   -Mike
 

And that's a people problem more than a process problem.  If nobody
tests it in updates-testing, then how is the maintainer to know that it
is problematic?  Certainly not solvable with even more repos for testing
content...

-- 
Jesse Keating RHCE  (http://jkeating.livejournal.com)
Fedora Project  (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JesseKeating)
GPG Public Key  (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub)
identi.ca   (http://identi.ca/jkeating)


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Jesse Keating wrote:

 On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 09:27 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
 
  The problem isn't GLODA and smart folders, it's that we have no process in
  place to identify and deal with problems like this before it's too late.

 Aside from updates-testing you mean, where people can test potential
 updates and give feedback as to how they work on their systems?


To me it seems very clear that at least some significant portion of our
users want the new thunderbird.  But it should not have been pushed on to
everyone.  I can't imagine someone like steved who keeps all of their
email forever... but instead of knowing what happened like steved did,
now has no idea why their computer has just stopped working.  What do you
think their opinion of Fedora is right now?

Feodra 11 should not have shipped with a beta but the previous stable
version.  The beta should have been in it's on repo where it could have
been maintained and updated outside of the main tree.  Like an
experimental repo.  Not a repo to see if it works and 3 people can speak
for everyone and have it pushed.  But a repo on it's own where we all
acknowledge it's buggy but that's ok because it's not enabled by default.
Stability for all, a little blood for those that acknowledge they can
handle it.

-Mike

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Jesse Keating wrote:

 On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 09:37 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
  On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Jesse Keating wrote:
 
   On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 09:27 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
   
The problem isn't GLODA and smart folders, it's that we have no process 
in
place to identify and deal with problems like this before it's too late.
  
   Aside from updates-testing you mean, where people can test potential
   updates and give feedback as to how they work on their systems?
  
 
  Fat lot of good it's doing.
 
  -Mike
 

 And that's a people problem more than a process problem.  If nobody
 tests it in updates-testing, then how is the maintainer to know that it
 is problematic?  Certainly not solvable with even more repos for testing
 content...


You let me know how three people in Fedora can miss a very subtle Firefox
memory leak.  How many people would need to use updates testing before the
thunderbird indexing problem is caught?  How long would it need to stay
there?  In this case updates-testing theory just does not match reality.

The status quo is broken, doing nothing will keep it that way.

-Mike

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-14 Thread Rahul Sundaram

On 10/14/2009 08:23 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:

 And that's a people problem more than a process problem.  If nobody
 tests it in updates-testing, then how is the maintainer to know that it
 is problematic?  Certainly not solvable with even more repos for testing
 content...

3 people give positive feedback and the update is automatically pushed
from updates-testing to updates despite atleast one feedback to the
contrary at

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2009-9911?_csrf_token=b77b748e49c5311eb85031331cb2f6474028d615

The UI changes certainly would be visible without any user feedback. The
buttons getting removed from the toolbar as well as smart folders were
immediately visible within minutes. Anyone with significant amount of
email would probably run into the indexing issue soon as well.

Note that the update indicates it is a security issue but doesnt explain
what the security fix is nor does it indicate what other major changes
are there. No notes has been entered to assist the testers. I don't
think the onus can be placed entirely on potential testers to provide
feedback within a week. That is just finger pointing and doesn't help
address such problems or even mitigate it.

Rahul

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?


On 10/13/2009 09:56 AM, Christopher Aillon wrote:

Not everyone had issues with the indexing so that seemed to slip past
testing. It was a change, but didn't seem to disrupt things, so we let
it slide.

We are looking at reverting both in F11.



Global indexing introduces legal issues, disk space requirements and CPU 
requirements that extend beyond F11...


Jeff



--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-14 Thread Michael Cronenworth

Jeff Garzik wrote:
 
 Global indexing introduces legal issues, disk space requirements and CPU
 requirements that extend beyond F11...
 


Maybe I'm a bit stupid, but what is the significance of how many files
your emails are stored in? Separating them out provides some sort of
security advantage?

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Updates-testing (was: Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?)

2009-10-14 Thread Alex Hudson


On 14/10/09 15:31, Jesse Keating wrote:

On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 09:27 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:


The problem isn't GLODA and smart folders, it's that we have no process in
place to identify and deal with problems like this before it's too late.


Aside from updates-testing you mean, where people can test potential
updates and give feedback as to how they work on their systems?



For me, there is a bit of a problem with updates-testing: the machine I 
work on is my primary desktop, and I'm extremely wary of getting myself 
into a situation I can't easily get out of. Now, you might argue that 
avoiding u-t is essentially avoiding the inevitable (and Tbird 3 has 
shown me that, so I agree), but it is riskier.


What would sell me totally on u-t was if there was something where I can 
roll back bad packages.


I'm pretty sure there are various obscure technical reasons why rolling 
back isn't possible in 100% of cases, but I don't think that's 
necessary. So long as it's in the high 90%s then it's good enough, and 
to be honest I would want to avoid testing updates I can't revert like 
the plague anyway: not being able to roll back to my mind is a good 
indicator of not being suitable for a stable release.


In my ideal world, PackageKit would update my stuff with testing 
updates, and anything which broke could be reverted back to some 
previous date or something - either by package if I can identify it, or 
by actual last-known-good date. I'm sure that's a tonne of work, but 
that's the only way I can see the testing system making sense for people 
who rely on their Fedora desktop.


Cheers

Alex.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: Updates-testing (was: Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?)




On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Alex Hudson wrote:


On 14/10/09 15:31, Jesse Keating wrote:

On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 09:27 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:


The problem isn't GLODA and smart folders, it's that we have no process in
place to identify and deal with problems like this before it's too late.


Aside from updates-testing you mean, where people can test potential
updates and give feedback as to how they work on their systems?



For me, there is a bit of a problem with updates-testing: the machine I work 
on is my primary desktop, and I'm extremely wary of getting myself into a 
situation I can't easily get out of. Now, you might argue that avoiding u-t 
is essentially avoiding the inevitable (and Tbird 3 has shown me that, so I 
agree), but it is riskier.


What would sell me totally on u-t was if there was something where I can roll 
back bad packages.


I'm pretty sure there are various obscure technical reasons why rolling back 
isn't possible in 100% of cases, but I don't think that's necessary. So long 
as it's in the high 90%s then it's good enough, and to be honest I would want 
to avoid testing updates I can't revert like the plague anyway: not being 
able to roll back to my mind is a good indicator of not being suitable for a 
stable release.


In my ideal world, PackageKit would update my stuff with testing updates, and 
anything which broke could be reverted back to some previous date or 
something - either by package if I can identify it, or by actual 
last-known-good date. I'm sure that's a tonne of work, but that's the only 
way I can see the testing system making sense for people who rely on their 
Fedora desktop.


yum downgrade pkgname

it works fine for the simple-ish cases.

-sv

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: Updates-testing (was: Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?)

On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Alex Hudson wrote:

 On 14/10/09 15:31, Jesse Keating wrote:
  On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 09:27 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
 
   The problem isn't GLODA and smart folders, it's that we have no process in
   place to identify and deal with problems like this before it's too late.
  
  Aside from updates-testing you mean, where people can test potential
  updates and give feedback as to how they work on their systems?
 

 For me, there is a bit of a problem with updates-testing: the machine I work
 on is my primary desktop, and I'm extremely wary of getting myself into a
 situation I can't easily get out of. Now, you might argue that avoiding u-t is
 essentially avoiding the inevitable (and Tbird 3 has shown me that, so I
 agree), but it is riskier.

 What would sell me totally on u-t was if there was something where I can roll
 back bad packages.


I've suggested this very thing in a F-A-B thread this week.  We,
packagers, have no way to fix a mistake and very few things preventing us
from making them:

https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2009-October/msg00168.html

-Mike

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-14 Thread Jesse Keating

On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 11:31 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
 On 10/13/2009 09:56 AM, Christopher Aillon wrote:
  Not everyone had issues with the indexing so that seemed to slip past
  testing. It was a change, but didn't seem to disrupt things, so we let
  it slide.
 
  We are looking at reverting both in F11.
 
 
 Global indexing introduces legal issues, disk space requirements and CPU 
 requirements that extend beyond F11...
 
   Jeff
 
 
 

Those are defaults that a user can change.  Granted, existing setups
shouldn't be automatically moved to the new default, but new installs of
a new release should default to the upstream default.  If the user
doesn't find those settings acceptable, they can change them.  The trick
is to not surprise existing users with massive change.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?


On 10/14/2009 11:35 AM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:

Jeff Garzik wrote:


Global indexing introduces legal issues, disk space requirements and CPU
requirements that extend beyond F11...




Maybe I'm a bit stupid, but what is the significance of how many files
your emails are stored in? Separating them out provides some sort of
security advantage?



Legally speaking, it is important, if I am ever called into court, to be 
able to show a distinct separation between my personal email and my 
NDA-heavy Red Hat email.  And, bboth of which must be separate from my 
micro-micro-corporation.


If one does not demonstrate intent at creating walls separating legal 
entities, it becomes a whole lot easier for a GarzikMicroCorp-related 
lawsuit to subpoena my personal and Red Hat email.


Separation of data is basic legal CYA.

Jeff



--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: Updates-testing (was: Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?)




On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Mike McGrath wrote:



I've suggested this very thing in a F-A-B thread this week.  We,
packagers, have no way to fix a mistake and very few things preventing us
from making them:

https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2009-October/msg00168.html



Seriously:

yum downgrade

and in F12 - try out things like the history undo options.

there are lots of potential nasty situations that can happen but I think 
the general consensus was 'screw it, let the user sort it out if it 
breaks, which it often does not'


generally, if the app you updated modifies its data format and cannot 
revert it then the user is SOL - but that's not _THAT_ common and when it 
does happen it's certainly not yum's fault.


-sv

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-14 Thread Michael Cronenworth

Jeff Garzik wrote:
 
 
 Legally speaking, it is important, if I am ever called into court, to be
 able to show a distinct separation between my personal email and my
 NDA-heavy Red Hat email.  And, bboth of which must be separate from my
 micro-micro-corporation.
 
 If one does not demonstrate intent at creating walls separating legal
 entities, it becomes a whole lot easier for a GarzikMicroCorp-related
 lawsuit to subpoena my personal and Red Hat email.
 
 Separation of data is basic legal CYA.
 


I fully understand the separation of email accounts, but what I'm
getting at is the storage of your binary data on the hard disk. If you
keep any personal email on your hard disk, and the whole disk is
subpoenaed, your personal+RH email will be on it. The only safe way to
prevent that is to not use TB at all. It keeps caches of everything
whether you like it or not. In fact, it might be a cool feature to add
to TB - a corporate mode so to speak - that prevents any and all local
storage of email data.

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?


On 10/14/2009 12:03 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:

I fully understand the separation of email accounts, but what I'm
getting at is the storage of your binary data on the hard disk. If you
keep any personal email on your hard disk, and the whole disk is
subpoenaed, your personal+RH email will be on it. The only safe way to
prevent that is to not use TB at all. It keeps caches of everything
whether you like it or not. In fact, it might be a cool feature to add
to TB - a corporate mode so to speak - that prevents any and all local
storage of email data.


That is why my cache points to a tmpfs location...  goes away after each 
reboot.


Jeff


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-14 Thread Richard W.M. Jones

On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:00:07AM -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
 You let me know how three people in Fedora can miss a very subtle Firefox
 memory leak.  How many people would need to use updates testing before the
 thunderbird indexing problem is caught?  How long would it need to stay
 there?  In this case updates-testing theory just does not match reality.

Maybe 1 in 10 Fedora installs at random should have updates-testing
enabled by default?

(Joke, joke ...)

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://et.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-df/

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: Updates-testing (was: Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?)

What about using LVM to store a pre-update snapshot of your distro?

(Separate root partition from /home and other stuff, of course.  Roll
back root).

Highly inconvenient, but it would theoretically work...

On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Seth Vidal skvi...@fedoraproject.org wrote:


 On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Mike McGrath wrote:


 I've suggested this very thing in a F-A-B thread this week.  We,
 packagers, have no way to fix a mistake and very few things preventing us
 from making them:


 https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2009-October/msg00168.html


 Seriously:

 yum downgrade

 and in F12 - try out things like the history undo options.

 there are lots of potential nasty situations that can happen but I think the
 general consensus was 'screw it, let the user sort it out if it breaks,
 which it often does not'

 generally, if the app you updated modifies its data format and cannot revert
 it then the user is SOL - but that's not _THAT_ common and when it does
 happen it's certainly not yum's fault.

 -sv

 --
 fedora-devel-list mailing list
 fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
 https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list


-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: Updates-testing (was: Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?)




On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Jud Craft wrote:


What about using LVM to store a pre-update snapshot of your distro?

(Separate root partition from /home and other stuff, of course.  Roll
back root).

Highly inconvenient, but it would theoretically work...



It doesn't really help you when your data is modified by the update.
example:

installed: foo-1.0
data format: user:group:data:index:key
update: foo-1.2
data is migrated forward from the old format to the new one, new format is
stored in the same file but is:
user:group,group,group,group:data:data:data:index

(obviously I'm just making up the data format :)


how do you roll back and not lose access to the data in that file?

-sv


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: Updates-testing (was: Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?)

2009-10-14 Thread Jesse Keating

On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 10:49 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
 have no way to fix a mistake

That is complete bullshit.  You have many ways to fix mistakes.  Newer
builds with patches, reverted code with epoch, newer upstream release to
fix the mistake upstream, etc..  To say that there is no way to fix a
mistake is insulting.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

Mike McGrath mmcgrath at redhat.com writes:

  And that's a people problem more than a process problem.  If nobody
  tests it in updates-testing, then how is the maintainer to know that it
  is problematic?  Certainly not solvable with even more repos for testing
  content...
 
 
 You let me know how three people in Fedora can miss a very subtle Firefox
 memory leak.  How many people would need to use updates testing before the
 thunderbird indexing problem is caught?  How long would it need to stay
 there?  In this case updates-testing theory just does not match reality.
 
 The status quo is broken, doing nothing will keep it that way.
 
   -Mike
 

Actually I don't think the blame is directly layable at the feet of either the
Fedora maintainer (who pushed an update with reasonable reports in bodhi
according to normal practice), nor the Fedora process which should have worked
if no poor upstream changes were made - but in fact this shows up the
vulnerability of Fedora to packages which have bad decisions made upstream.

In this case the upstream developers made a really bad decision to foist the
GLODA change and the smart folder change on users who installed this beta,
instead of taking the safer, and in my view better, decision to bring in these
new features, but to leave them switched off by default, but to advertise the
availability of these new features big time, and then let this simmer for a
while and wait for any bad user feedback.  Only if the new features were then
shown to be acceptable should they be enabled in a future update by default. In
this case, going that route would have shown that the new features were
certainly not acceptable to all users, and in particular users with large
amounts of stored mail with multiple accounts.



-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: Updates-testing (was: Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?)

On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
 Newer builds with patches, reverted code with epoch, newer upstream release to
 fix the mistake upstream, etc..  To say that there is no way to fix a
 mistake is insulting.

I'd like to logic-link here with the following...


On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:57 PM, Seth Vidal wrote:
 It doesn't really help you when your data is modified by the update.


So if my LVM snapshot and revert entire Fedora installed idea is
dismissed as still not perfect, why is just revert one package
pushed as a legitimate alternative?

They both suffer from the same problem -- new packages may cause
changes in data that are not reversibly compatible with the old
package, and mere package rollback is not useful.

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: Updates-testing (was: Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?)

On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Jud Craft wrote:
 They both suffer from the same problem -- new packages may cause
 changes in data that are not reversibly compatible with the old
 package, and mere package rollback is not useful.


Of course, I imagine that any rollback system that doesn't involve
user data will have the same problem, theoretically.

That includes any backup system that treats system programs separate
from user data, when in fact one DOES change the other.

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: Updates-testing (was: Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?)

On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Seth Vidal wrote:
 There's no perfect.

 we're just going for 'good enough', really.

Ah, so package-rollback is shipped as the halfway-effective crutch,
but it's so easy to implement we might as well offer it anyway
solution.

Or, the excellent implementation of an incomplete solution.  [No
offense to the infrastructure design of yum, just stating the obvious
here.]

On the side, I store all of my user data and documents separate from
my own actual home partition, and with every install I just wipe the
home, and then re-link my documents and data to it.

This scheme works decently (application-specific schemas and configs
that are subject to irreversible change are discarded and recreated).
But it's a pain to compensate for an inconvenient reality (that I must
continually reinstall my distribution as a Fedora user, and I'm tired
of having to migrate user data, where even residual /home directories
leave rot).

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: Updates-testing (was: Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?)




On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Jud Craft wrote:


On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Seth Vidal wrote:

There's no perfect.

we're just going for 'good enough', really.


Ah, so package-rollback is shipped as the halfway-effective crutch,
but it's so easy to implement we might as well offer it anyway
solution.


actually it is shipped as an easy win for simple 
update-is-broken-and-downgrading-is-painless cases which we run into all 
the time.


Your suggestion of having an lvm snapshot is absolutely appropriate for 
those too - it just requires more thinking ahead of time when the system 
is being setup which a lot of users are not going to do.




Or, the excellent implementation of an incomplete solution.  [No
offense to the infrastructure design of yum, just stating the obvious
here.]



There's no complete solution, really. We'd have to know an enormous amount 
about each update and what data it modifies to completely solve the 
problem and we just don't have that info and I doubt we could reasonably 
compile it for EVERY package we maintain.


So we implement a reasonable partial solution and deal with the edge cases 
as they come.


  On the side, I store all of my user data and documents separate from

my own actual home partition, and with every install I just wipe the
home, and then re-link my documents and data to it.


good choice. That's good planning.


-sv

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: Updates-testing (was: Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?)

2009-10-14 Thread Nicolas Mailhot



Le Mer 14 octobre 2009 19:11, Jud Craft a écrit :

 So if my LVM snapshot and revert entire Fedora installed idea is
 dismissed as still not perfect, why is just revert one package
 pushed as a legitimate alternative?

Revert one package won't eat the data created while you used the new problem
version. That's the problem with full-FS images: they do not distinguish
between the different kinds of files.

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot


-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Christopher Aillon wrote:

 On 10/14/2009 07:56 AM, Mike McGrath wrote:
  Feodra 11 should not have shipped with a beta but the previous stable
  version.

 That's really easy for you to say, considering you don't use Thunderbird, and
 you have no information about the decision making process.

 The information I used to make the decision was:

 * The upstream release date was going to be within a week of
   F11's release date, from a normally reliable source
 * 3.0 had many desirable improvements to performance
 * 2.0 would be EOL'd by upstream soon
 * Thunderbird users tend to be in the want upgrade now camp
 * Changing from 2.0 - 3.0 after F11 was released is not something I
   wanted to do
 * Tb3 beta would affect a smaller portion of Fedora users anyway since
   Thunderbird is _not_ the default mail client.
 * Given initial testing by my team, and tracking upstream feedback, it
   worked well enough and there were no major regressions over 2.0.


 Given the situation and circumstances, with the information I had available, I
 would make the same decision again.


I would have made the same decision as you, that doesn't mean it wasn't a
mistake.  We have no policies or procedures in place to guide you, me or
anyone else otherwise.  As such, we run into these issues, cause pain for
the users, etc, etc.

-Mike

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Mike McGrath wrote:

 On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Christopher Aillon wrote:

  On 10/14/2009 07:56 AM, Mike McGrath wrote:
   Feodra 11 should not have shipped with a beta but the previous stable
   version.
 
  That's really easy for you to say, considering you don't use Thunderbird, 
  and
  you have no information about the decision making process.
 
  The information I used to make the decision was:
 
  * The upstream release date was going to be within a week of
F11's release date, from a normally reliable source
  * 3.0 had many desirable improvements to performance
  * 2.0 would be EOL'd by upstream soon
  * Thunderbird users tend to be in the want upgrade now camp
  * Changing from 2.0 - 3.0 after F11 was released is not something I
wanted to do
  * Tb3 beta would affect a smaller portion of Fedora users anyway since
Thunderbird is _not_ the default mail client.
  * Given initial testing by my team, and tracking upstream feedback, it
worked well enough and there were no major regressions over 2.0.
 
 
  Given the situation and circumstances, with the information I had 
  available, I
  would make the same decision again.
 

 I would have made the same decision as you, that doesn't mean it wasn't a
 mistake.  We have no policies or procedures in place to guide you, me or
 anyone else otherwise.  As such, we run into these issues, cause pain for
 the users, etc, etc.


Just an additional note to this, Mozilla themselves are still directing
people to download Thunderbird 2.

http://www.mozillamessaging.com/en-US/thunderbird/

-Mike

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: Updates-testing (was: Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?)

2009-10-14 Thread chasd



Seth Vidal wrote:


Seriously:

yum downgrade

and in F12 - try out things like the history undo options.

there are lots of potential nasty situations that can happen but I  
think the general consensus was 'screw it, let the user sort it out  
if it breaks, which it often does not'


generally, if the app you updated modifies its data format and  
cannot revert it then the user is SOL - but that's not _THAT_  
common and when it does happen it's certainly not yum's fault.


If it isn't that common, could yum have added directives to its  
configuration ( similar to  exclude=  ) ?
This could increase the reliability of  yum downgrade  in the eyes  
of those that use it.


MySQL and PostgreSQL come to mind.
/etc/yum.conf might have  nodowngrade=mysql-server postgresql-server  
 in the default file.

That's easier than carrying that info in the package or repo files.
When additional packages are found to be not downgradable, they can  
be added to the list.

Granted, if there are a lot of packages, that gets unwieldy.
Also, it could break a downgrade transaction.


--
Charles Dostale

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: Updates-testing (was: Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?)




On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, chasd wrote:



Seth Vidal wrote:


Seriously:

yum downgrade

and in F12 - try out things like the history undo options.

there are lots of potential nasty situations that can happen but I think 
the general consensus was 'screw it, let the user sort it out if it breaks, 
which it often does not'


generally, if the app you updated modifies its data format and cannot 
revert it then the user is SOL - but that's not _THAT_ common and when it 
does happen it's certainly not yum's fault.


If it isn't that common, could yum have added directives to its configuration 
( similar to  exclude=  ) ?
This could increase the reliability of  yum downgrade  in the eyes of those 
that use it.


MySQL and PostgreSQL come to mind.
/etc/yum.conf might have  nodowngrade=mysql-server postgresql-server  in 
the default file.

That's easier than carrying that info in the package or repo files.
When additional packages are found to be not downgradable, they can be added 
to the list.

Granted, if there are a lot of packages, that gets unwieldy.
Also, it could break a downgrade transaction.



I have no idea what that would do? just tell the user tough noogies?

-sv

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: Updates-testing (was: Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?)

2009-10-14 Thread Bruno Wolff III

On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 13:55:13 -0500,
  chasd ch...@silveroaks.com wrote:
 
 MySQL and PostgreSQL come to mind.

Postgres isn't even updatable. You need to do dumps before doing the upgrade.
So downgrades aren't too much worse than upgrades. (Though the new dumps
might use new features that will need to get modified to make them readable
by old versions.)

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-14 Thread Luke Macken

On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:00:07AM -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
 On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Jesse Keating wrote:
 
  On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 09:37 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
   On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Jesse Keating wrote:
  
On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 09:27 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:

 The problem isn't GLODA and smart folders, it's that we have no 
 process in
 place to identify and deal with problems like this before it's too 
 late.
   
Aside from updates-testing you mean, where people can test potential
updates and give feedback as to how they work on their systems?
   
  
   Fat lot of good it's doing.
  
 -Mike
  
 
  And that's a people problem more than a process problem.  If nobody
  tests it in updates-testing, then how is the maintainer to know that it
  is problematic?  Certainly not solvable with even more repos for testing
  content...
 
 
 You let me know how three people in Fedora can miss a very subtle Firefox
 memory leak.  How many people would need to use updates testing before the
 thunderbird indexing problem is caught?  How long would it need to stay
 there?  In this case updates-testing theory just does not match reality.
 
 The status quo is broken, doing nothing will keep it that way.

I think there are many things we can do within Bodhi  Fedora Community
to better facilitate testing updates.  For example, I think we should do
a better job of emphasizing the importance of certain updates in the
queue, especially security updates with little or no karma.

The karma system that I implemented in bodhi hasn't really changed much
over the years, and I think it's probably time to reassess some of the
default options (eg: +3 for marking as stable is probably way too low
for packages like the kernel and thunderbird).

Since there are actually a lot of people who provide feedback in bodhi
(presently 1448 different people have left comments in bodhi since F10),
we obviously are not doing a good enough job of leveraging them.

One way to improve our testing strategy would be to keep adding and
improving the test cases to the wiki:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Test_Cases

We could then point people directly to the appropriate steps for testing
the application, from within bodhi, fedora community, etc...

luke

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-14 Thread Adam Williamson

On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 20:31 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 10/14/2009 08:23 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:

And that's a people problem more than a process problem. If nobody
tests it in updates-testing, then how is the maintainer to know that it
is problematic? Certainly not solvable with even more repos for testing
content...

3 people give positive feedback and the update is automatically pushed
from updates-testing to updates despite atleast one feedback to the
contrary at

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2009-9911?_csrf_token=b77b748e49c5311eb85031331cb2f6474028d615

The UI changes certainly would be visible without any user feedback. The
buttons getting removed from the toolbar as well as smart folders were
immediately visible within minutes. Anyone with significant amount of
email would probably run into the indexing issue soon as well.

Note that the update indicates it is a security issue but doesnt explain
what the security fix is nor does it indicate what other major changes
are there. No notes has been entered to assist the testers. I don't
think the onus can be placed entirely on potential testers to provide
feedback within a week. That is just finger pointing and doesn't help
address such problems or even mitigate it.

It's worth looking in more detail at exactly what the feedback was.
Here's some of the feedback which was marked positive, i.e. +1:

loving the new search stuff

Works for me, is it intended behaviour that several buttons including
Delete disappear off the main (top) toolbar?

without those two bits of feedback - which noted what were later
identified as problems with the update, but nevertheless rated it
positively - it wouldn't have been pushed. it only ever hit exactly +3,
never higher. without those comments, it would have hit a max of +1.

so I disagree with the notion that bodhi / updates-testing are useless
(fat lot of good), and agree with Jesse that the evidence doesn't
support the conclusion that the best fix is to throw more repositories
at the problem.

I'd agree with Jesse's point that it would've been best for the
maintainers to disable the +3-automatic-push for this update, though
hindsight is always 20-20. perhaps we (QA / rel-eng) need to give more
specific advice about when to use it. My perspective would be that
automatic-push should only be used when you're making a small-scale
update which fixes one or two specific issues and does not change
behaviour in other ways. It should not be used for a big update like
this which rolls up many 'fixes' and things which can't strictly be
described as fixes, because you're going to get a situation like this
where it's hard for a simple +1 / -1 from individual testers to judge
the update.

We might also look at providing better instructions for people providing
feedback on exactly when to use the +1, -1 and 0 options. I'll try and
find some time to look at that.

--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?




On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Luke Macken wrote:


I think there are many things we can do within Bodhi  Fedora Community
to better facilitate testing updates.  For example, I think we should do
a better job of emphasizing the importance of certain updates in the
queue, especially security updates with little or no karma.




Before we go working on the karma system - is it doable to add some fields 
so we can denote critical path pkgs?


If I know there is a place for the data, I can get you quick code to 
produce the list given any set of pkgs as soon as tomorrow. Hell, It is 
already written, iirc.


It seems like critpath is more important in bodhi than karma, to me.

-sv

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-14 Thread Luke Macken

On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 06:53:22PM -0400, Seth Vidal wrote:


 On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Luke Macken wrote:

 I think there are many things we can do within Bodhi  Fedora Community
 to better facilitate testing updates.  For example, I think we should do
 a better job of emphasizing the importance of certain updates in the
 queue, especially security updates with little or no karma.



 Before we go working on the karma system - is it doable to add some 
 fields so we can denote critical path pkgs?

 If I know there is a place for the data, I can get you quick code to  
 produce the list given any set of pkgs as soon as tomorrow. Hell, It is  
 already written, iirc.

 It seems like critpath is more important in bodhi than karma, to me.

Yeah, I agree critpath is more important at the moment.

So we have a few options for where to throw this data.

 - We could add a new field to the bodhi Package SQLObject model
   This will entail DB schema changes.  I've never altered bodhi's
   model below our DB before, but I think we could maybe just run an
   ALTER TABLE, and be all set.  I'll have to test this first.  bodhi
   v2.0 will use SQLAlchemy, so we'll have much better schema migration
   tools to use.

 - The quick and dirty solution would be to generate the critpath list
   and stuff it in bodhi's config file (like we do with packages that
   require a reboot).  Or, if it's quick to generate,
   we could do it on startup.  I'm not sure how large the list is so
   we'll have to see.

 - We could also have a flag in the pkgdb for critpath packages, which
   would be simple to query.  It feels like the pkgdb should know about
   critpath packages.

There are probably some other ways too, but once I see the code to
generate I'm sure I can figure out how to get bodhi to use it.

luke

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-14 Thread John Poelstra


Mike McGrath said the following on 10/14/2009 11:26 AM Pacific Time:

On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Mike McGrath wrote:


On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Christopher Aillon wrote:


On 10/14/2009 07:56 AM, Mike McGrath wrote:

Feodra 11 should not have shipped with a beta but the previous stable
version.

That's really easy for you to say, considering you don't use Thunderbird, and
you have no information about the decision making process.

The information I used to make the decision was:

* The upstream release date was going to be within a week of
  F11's release date, from a normally reliable source
* 3.0 had many desirable improvements to performance
* 2.0 would be EOL'd by upstream soon
* Thunderbird users tend to be in the want upgrade now camp
* Changing from 2.0 - 3.0 after F11 was released is not something I
  wanted to do
* Tb3 beta would affect a smaller portion of Fedora users anyway since
  Thunderbird is _not_ the default mail client.
* Given initial testing by my team, and tracking upstream feedback, it
  worked well enough and there were no major regressions over 2.0.


Given the situation and circumstances, with the information I had available, I
would make the same decision again.


I would have made the same decision as you, that doesn't mean it wasn't a
mistake.  We have no policies or procedures in place to guide you, me or
anyone else otherwise.  As such, we run into these issues, cause pain for
the users, etc, etc.



Just an additional note to this, Mozilla themselves are still directing
people to download Thunderbird 2.

http://www.mozillamessaging.com/en-US/thunderbird/

-Mike



This has been my work around since the addons I really depend on don't 
work on TB3.  I installed TB2 from the tarball and turned on automatic 
updates.  I also added an exclude to /etc/yum.conf for thunderbird.


John

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-13 Thread Rahul Sundaram

On 10/13/2009 11:28 AM, Christopher Aillon wrote:
 
 The changes were not expected.  Actually, the fact that TB3 is still in
 beta was not expected, since it was supposed to be released as a final
 within a week of FF35.  Clearly, things haven't been going as planned
 for upstream and that's had an effect on Fedora, too.  While the changes
 are unfortunate, they have gone through testing, and I'll note that
 Thunderbird is _NOT_ the default mail client in Fedora, so it won't
 impact the majority of Fedora users.  None of this is any excuse for
 things, but are important to consider when casting stones.

I am not casting stones. Just frustrated at Fedora updates frequently
causing problems. Was disabling those two features by default in the
update considered?

Rahul

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-13 Thread Jeff Garzik


On 10/13/2009 01:58 AM, Christopher Aillon wrote:

On 10/11/2009 09:46 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:

On 10/11/2009 10:03 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:


I do use TB (read my email headers). I fully understood that TB 3.0 was
in beta and could drastically change at any moment. I keep track of
their development as well so I was prepared for the changes that have
happened. If you expect beta software to act like stable software then
you need to update your dictionary.


Oh please. Expecting all Fedora thunderbird users to keep track of
upstream development of software included in Fedora is totally
ridiculous. The package maintainer made the judgement to include a beta
release of thunderbird. If major UI or other behaviour changes were
expected to follow in later revisions, it would have been wise to not
include the beta release in the first place. Otherwise, it would have
been easy enough to disable those couple of features we are talking
about in the update and avoid the hassle for users.


The changes were not expected. Actually, the fact that TB3 is still in
beta was not expected, since it was supposed to be released as a final
within a week of FF35. Clearly, things haven't been going as planned for
upstream and that's had an effect on Fedora, too. While the changes are
unfortunate, they have gone through testing, and I'll note that



er, huh?  What does that mean?

If testing had been done, then why were these two _blindingly obvious_ 
behavior changes pushed to F11?


Where did the process break down, then?

Did the package maintainer think that UI and indexing changes in the 
middle of a stable Fedora release are acceptable, general practice?


The indexing change has created a new wrinkle, too:  I separate my work 
and non-work email for LEGAL reasons.  Now the index has smushed those 
two together.  Lovely, fscking lovely...


Jeff



--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-13 Thread Christopher Aillon


On 10/12/2009 11:43 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote:

On 10/13/2009 01:58 AM, Christopher Aillon wrote:

On 10/11/2009 09:46 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:

On 10/11/2009 10:03 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:


I do use TB (read my email headers). I fully understood that TB 3.0 was
in beta and could drastically change at any moment. I keep track of
their development as well so I was prepared for the changes that have
happened. If you expect beta software to act like stable software then
you need to update your dictionary.


Oh please. Expecting all Fedora thunderbird users to keep track of
upstream development of software included in Fedora is totally
ridiculous. The package maintainer made the judgement to include a beta
release of thunderbird. If major UI or other behaviour changes were
expected to follow in later revisions, it would have been wise to not
include the beta release in the first place. Otherwise, it would have
been easy enough to disable those couple of features we are talking
about in the update and avoid the hassle for users.


The changes were not expected. Actually, the fact that TB3 is still in
beta was not expected, since it was supposed to be released as a final
within a week of FF35. Clearly, things haven't been going as planned for
upstream and that's had an effect on Fedora, too. While the changes are
unfortunate, they have gone through testing, and I'll note that



er, huh? What does that mean?

If testing had been done, then why were these two _blindingly obvious_
behavior changes pushed to F11?

Where did the process break down, then?

Did the package maintainer think that UI and indexing changes in the
middle of a stable Fedora release are acceptable, general practice?

The indexing change has created a new wrinkle, too: I separate my work
and non-work email for LEGAL reasons. Now the index has smushed those
two together. Lovely, fscking lovely...


The UI change was obvious, but as it was upstream's decision, and we 
follow upstream, didn't think much of it.  In retrospect, we should have 
considered undoing that change.  We are looking into that now.


Not everyone had issues with the indexing so that seemed to slip past 
testing.  It was a change, but didn't seem to disrupt things, so we let 
it slide.


We are looking at reverting both in F11.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-13 Thread Christopher Aillon


On 10/12/2009 11:18 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:

On 10/13/2009 11:28 AM, Christopher Aillon wrote:


The changes were not expected.  Actually, the fact that TB3 is still in
beta was not expected, since it was supposed to be released as a final
within a week of FF35.  Clearly, things haven't been going as planned
for upstream and that's had an effect on Fedora, too.  While the changes
are unfortunate, they have gone through testing, and I'll note that
Thunderbird is _NOT_ the default mail client in Fedora, so it won't
impact the majority of Fedora users.  None of this is any excuse for
things, but are important to consider when casting stones.


I am not casting stones. Just frustrated at Fedora updates frequently
causing problems. Was disabling those two features by default in the
update considered?


No, because they didn't cause problems for us or anyone in testing, and 
the changes were not expected to cause much of an issue.  The UI change 
was obvious, but we had no problem with it, and did not expect an uproar 
over it.  The indexer works for some people without issue, but 
apparently not for all people without issue.  It's unfortunate that the 
people who tried it after it was pushed live were the ones affected, but 
them's the breaks.  As I said, we're looking at what we can do for both 
issues in F11.


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-13 Thread Mike Cloaked

Christopher Aillon caillon at redhat.com writes:

 The UI change was obvious, but as it was upstream's decision, and we 
 follow upstream, didn't think much of it.  In retrospect, we should have 
 considered undoing that change.  We are looking into that now.
 
 Not everyone had issues with the indexing so that seemed to slip past 
 testing.  It was a change, but didn't seem to disrupt things, so we let 
 it slide.
 
 We are looking at reverting both in F11.
 

Please don't revert the package - now that I have configured TB to work well by
switching off gloda and also switching off smart folders it actually does work
well!  Maybe it could be an optional package revert?



-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-13 Thread Adam Williamson

On Sun, 2009-10-11 at 11:15 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
 On 10/11/2009 03:41 AM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
  I don't think so. Not willing to put words in Jeff's mouth, but I don't
  think he was discussing the UI changes of Thunderbird. I took it as he was 
  rather
  discussing the upgrade process within Fedora.
 
 
 So never ship beta software? That nixes a lot of Fedora packages.
 
  FWIW, I felt the disruption in my workflow as well. All of a sudden, TB
  almost freezed my computer, eating ~ 1GB of memory (OK, I have a lot of
  emails but still) and all that, in F-11 which is a stable version of the 
  distro.
 
  I think this is the right forum to discuss how we can avoid or a least
  manage users workflow disruption within stable versions of our distro.
 
 
 Heavily patch all TB 3.0 to act like TB 2.0? That seems silly, don't you 
 think?

I believe the suggestion was to make a very minor configuration change
so the new behaviours were not enabled by default.

-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-13 Thread Rahul Sundaram

On 10/13/2009 07:40 PM, Christopher Aillon wrote:

 No, because they didn't cause problems for us or anyone in testing, and
 the changes were not expected to cause much of an issue.  The UI change
 was obvious, but we had no problem with it, and did not expect an uproar
 over it.  The indexer works for some people without issue, but
 apparently not for all people without issue.  It's unfortunate that the
 people who tried it after it was pushed live were the ones affected, but
 them's the breaks.  As I said, we're looking at what we can do for both
 issues in F11.

The general attitude in this thread (not you) and elsewhere that it was
ok to cause problems was worrying me. Thanks for looking into this problem.

Rahul

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-13 Thread Mike Cloaked

Rahul Sundaram sundaram at fedoraproject.org writes:

 The general attitude in this thread (not you) and elsewhere that it was
 ok to cause problems was worrying me. Thanks for looking into this problem.
 
 Rahul

I am not sure that there is evidence for that!  I think that some people were
justifyably concerned that a package was released that had a major change to
settings and user experience, and caused some serious difficulties including
problems that gave large CPU and disk loads for a considerable and unjustifiable
periods - (me included) until the workarounds were known, but that once this
package was released and the knowledge and guidance on how to resolve the main
problems was known then reversing the release was not really an option.

However 3.0pre is around the corner (well you can download and run it
independently if you want to), and there will hopefully be later versions that
avoid the main problems that have arisen. By the way beta 4 did fix some bugs
related to TLS connections that I had, and that were certainly present in beta 2
- so there were some advantages in moving to the more recent beta.

It would also be a real help to users if the feedback from testing both prior to
pushing to updates-testing as well as in the updates-testing phase could lead to
some user notes attached to the final release that would guide users who bump
into these kinds of problems when doing what would be a normal yum update, and
expect things in a stable release to just work? (Question mark intended)

I know that we can do rpm -q --changelog foo or those of use who know what we
are doing can check the comments in bodhi but many users don't even know about
these.

 




-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-13 Thread Rahul Sundaram

On 10/14/2009 01:44 AM, Mike Cloaked wrote:
 Rahul Sundaram writes:
 
 The general attitude in this thread (not you) and elsewhere that it was
 ok to cause problems was worrying me. Thanks for looking into this problem.

 Rahul
 
 I am not sure that there is evidence for that!  

Evidence for what? The people who are complaining about this problem are
doing so because it is a real problem.

I think that some people were
 justifyably concerned that a package was released that had a major change to
 settings and user experience, and caused some serious difficulties including
 problems that gave large CPU and disk loads for a considerable and 
 unjustifiable
 periods - (me included) until the workarounds were known, but that once this
 package was released and the knowledge and guidance on how to resolve the main
 problems was known then reversing the release was not really an option.

Why not? The maintainer says it is a option and it is definitely
feasible to release a update that disables these couple of features by
default rather than make everybody go through the same problems. I don't
understand your view point at all.  Changelog or even testing notes is
useful to guide testers into checking for problems but once the problems
are evident, we should just address them directly. Only a tiny fraction
of our users will read such notes and it is not reasonable to expect
them to continue to suffer.

Rahul

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-12 Thread Christopher Aillon


On 10/11/2009 09:46 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:

On 10/11/2009 10:03 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:


I do use TB (read my email headers). I fully understood that TB 3.0 was
in beta and could drastically change at any moment. I keep track of
their development as well so I was prepared for the changes that have
happened. If you expect beta software to act like stable software then
you need to update your dictionary.


Oh please. Expecting all Fedora thunderbird users to keep track of
upstream development of software included in Fedora is totally
ridiculous. The package maintainer made the judgement to include a beta
release of thunderbird. If major UI or other behaviour changes were
expected to follow in later revisions, it would have been wise to not
include the beta release in the first place. Otherwise, it would have
been easy enough to disable those couple of features we are talking
about in the update and avoid the hassle for users.


The changes were not expected.  Actually, the fact that TB3 is still in 
beta was not expected, since it was supposed to be released as a final 
within a week of FF35.  Clearly, things haven't been going as planned 
for upstream and that's had an effect on Fedora, too.  While the changes 
are unfortunate, they have gone through testing, and I'll note that 
Thunderbird is _NOT_ the default mail client in Fedora, so it won't 
impact the majority of Fedora users.  None of this is any excuse for 
things, but are important to consider when casting stones.


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?


On 10/10/2009 11:07 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote:


Just upgraded my F11 workstation, which included an upgrade to 
thunderbird-3.0-2.7.b4.fc11.x86_64


Without any prompting or warning, my email layout -- a key interface 
into my open source development workflow -- was changed to use 
something called smart folders.




Wrong list and a week late[1]. No need to continue the old discussion here.

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/2009-October/msg00110.html

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-11 Thread Dodji Seketeli

On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 01:03:01AM -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
 Wrong list and a week late[1]. No need to continue the old discussion here.

 [1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/2009-October/msg00110.html

I don't think so. Not willing to put words in Jeff's mouth, but I don't
think he was discussing the UI changes of Thunderbird. I took it as he was 
rather
discussing the upgrade process within Fedora.

FWIW, I felt the disruption in my workflow as well. All of a sudden, TB
almost freezed my computer, eating ~ 1GB of memory (OK, I have a lot of
emails but still) and all that, in F-11 which is a stable version of the distro.

I think this is the right forum to discuss how we can avoid or a least
manage users workflow disruption within stable versions of our distro.

-- 
Dodji Seketeli
Red Hat, Inc.

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

On 10/11/2009 02:11 PM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
 On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 01:03:01AM -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
 Wrong list and a week late[1]. No need to continue the old discussion here.

 [1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/2009-October/msg00110.html
 
 I don't think so. Not willing to put words in Jeff's mouth, but I don't
 think he was discussing the UI changes of Thunderbird. I took it as he was 
 rather
 discussing the upgrade process within Fedora.

It is a bit of both really. A single update causes the folders to move
around because smart folders was suddenly enabled and that UI change
is very disruptive. It took some time to figure out what the heck was
happening.

The second problem was that thunderbird started indexing all my mails
all of a sudden and again, that is a dirsuption because it essentially
makes the mail client unusable for quite sometime.

It was ok to ship a beta release of thunderbird but updates shouldn't
cause such issues. If the fixes were necessary to push as updates then
it would have prudent to disable smart folders and indexing by
default and leave it enabled in Fedora 12.

Rahul

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-11 Thread Jeff Garzik


On 10/11/2009 04:54 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:

It was ok to ship a beta release of thunderbird but updates shouldn't
cause such issues. If the fixes were necessary to push as updates then
it would have prudent to disable smart folders and indexing by
default and leave it enabled in Fedora 12.


Precisely.  F11 is supposed to be a stable release.  The sudden 
appearance of both smart folders and indexing was unexpected, disruptive 
and IMO did not achieve the desired quality level for a Fedora stable 
release upgrade.


Jeff


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-11 Thread Tim Lauridsen


On 10/11/2009 11:16 AM, Jeff Garzik wrote:

On 10/11/2009 04:54 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:

It was ok to ship a beta release of thunderbird but updates shouldn't
cause such issues. If the fixes were necessary to push as updates then
it would have prudent to disable smart folders and indexing by
default and leave it enabled in Fedora 12.


Precisely.  F11 is supposed to be a stable release.  The sudden 
appearance of both smart folders and indexing was unexpected, 
disruptive and IMO did not achieve the desired quality level for a 
Fedora stable release upgrade.


Jeff


There is a difference between stable and static, if we have a beta of 
thunderbird in F11, then it expected to change between beta releases.
The new search features are very cool, we should be happy someone uses 
the time to give us all this cool new features.


Tim

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-11 Thread Dodji Seketeli

On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 11:29:19AM +0200, Tim Lauridsen wrote:
 There is a difference between stable and static, if we have a beta of  
 thunderbird in F11, then it expected to change between beta releases.

Sure. But at the same time the word stable in the expression
stable version ought to mean something, I guess.

My point is this is a matter of personal judgement. If the change is
going to be too disruptive (and that's a maintainer call)
then maybe having a Fedora-blessed repository like this great one
http://rpms.famillecollet.com/fedora/11/remi/x86_64/repoview
could be a possible way to go. At the same time, the package could be
updated straight to Rawhide, of course.

 The new search features are very cool, we should be happy someone uses  
 the time to give us all this cool new features.

I was not discussing that. Those changes are cool. I agree. But we also have
to take in account the drawbacks that come with that coolness and strike
a balance so that stable distro users aren't too disrupted in
their workflows.

-- 
Dodji Seketeli
Red Hat

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-11 Thread Ralf Corsepius


On 10/11/2009 11:29 AM, Tim Lauridsen wrote:

On 10/11/2009 11:16 AM, Jeff Garzik wrote:

On 10/11/2009 04:54 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:

It was ok to ship a beta release of thunderbird but updates shouldn't
cause such issues. If the fixes were necessary to push as updates then
it would have prudent to disable smart folders and indexing by
default and leave it enabled in Fedora 12.


Precisely. F11 is supposed to be a stable release. The sudden
appearance of both smart folders and indexing was unexpected,
disruptive and IMO did not achieve the desired quality level for a
Fedora stable release upgrade.

ACK, but ...


There is a difference between stable and static,  if we have a beta of

 thunderbird in F11, then it expected to change between beta releases.

... to me, in this context stable should also imply sufficently 
functional rsp. near release quality. From my experiences with the 
thunderbird-3*betas in F11, this does not apply to any of the 
thunderbird we had in F11 [1].



The new search features are very cool, we should be happy someone uses
the time to give us all this cool new features.
Well, coolness is relative - It's a feature, I have never missed or 
been waiting for :-)


Ralf

[1] I have been (and still am) facing: Corrupted (imap) mail-indices, 
mal-formated subject lines, being unable to send non-base64 encoded 
attachments, sth. occasionally producing duplicate mails and several 
other nuisances (e.g. one core dump at average per day).


New with 3*b4: A significant slowdown, seemingly due to indexing at 
startup, compacting folders triggers warnings in deep imap-folders 
(used to work with older thunderbirds and still works with evolution).




--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-11 Thread Mail Lists


 There are several issues being discussed here.

 Thunderbird itself and what upstream are doing:
  
   (i) In my view smart folders are silly most of the time.
   Comixing different accounts is a really bad idea.

   (ii) GLODA = the global indexing nonsense is beyond silly

  This is not just indexing each account - its accross ALL accounts.
  Especially when you note that it will only index things that TB
has a local copy of in mbox format - and TB switched to make local
copies of everything by default.

  This is a solution looking for a problem - its also a problematic
solution for most, with runaway indexing, 90% CPU, eating GiB of space
etc. A good example of a runaway idea.

   I run a local imap server precisely to be independent of mail client.
Having duplicate copies of everything in mbox format (ug)  and GiB
of index .. ug.


 Upgrade Process:
 ---
 I believe we should be picking up the newer versions - in fact
moving to 3.0pre and 3.0 final. TB has quirks, but overall things are
improving. We still have evo too ..

That all said - both the above changes are simple to turn off - and
as Rahul said, prolly shoulda been off by default in our version.

In this case there is an easy way to make things smooth. In other
cases there may not be

For such cases we can:

   a) Not update
   b) Update
   c) Install as alternative for those who want it.

   (c) is a nice possible option if something is invasive yet of interest.

gene/



-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-11 Thread Nicolas Mailhot



Le Dim 11 octobre 2009 16:48, Mail Lists a écrit :

   This is not just indexing each account - its accross ALL accounts.
   Especially when you note that it will only index things that TB
 has a local copy of in mbox format - and TB switched to make local
 copies of everything by default.

It is nice to see that the “reborn” Mozilla mail client still thinks in terms
of pop3+mbox. This is sooo typical of the FLOSS desktop: avoid hard issues
(such as thinking in maildir+imap, actually writing a ldap backend for gconf,
taking the time to think about non-laptop systems), and pile up demo-quality
bling (that no one will use because it's not robust enough for real life)

There are three schools of design: the latin
flashy-but-will-be-broken-in-a-week, the German
just-enough-minimalist-rock-solid-workhorse, and the worst
insufficient-minimalist-will-be-broken-in-a-month (people that think Germans
like black, and release gadgets in brittle plastic, when Germans like solid
plastic, which is usually black). Unfortunately our desktop people never seem
to choose option 2.

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot


-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-11 Thread Nicolas Mailhot



Le Dim 11 octobre 2009 18:02, Nicolas Mailhot a écrit :

 There are three schools of design: […]. Unfortunately our desktop people
never seem
 to choose option 2.

Sorry about the unfair generalization, there are of course exceptions
http://linuxplumbersconf.org/2009/slides/Paul-Davis-lpc2009.pdf

But it's sad they are so few.

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot


-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?


On 10/11/2009 03:41 AM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:

I don't think so. Not willing to put words in Jeff's mouth, but I don't
think he was discussing the UI changes of Thunderbird. I took it as he was 
rather
discussing the upgrade process within Fedora.
   


So never ship beta software? That nixes a lot of Fedora packages.


FWIW, I felt the disruption in my workflow as well. All of a sudden, TB
almost freezed my computer, eating ~ 1GB of memory (OK, I have a lot of
emails but still) and all that, in F-11 which is a stable version of the distro.

I think this is the right forum to discuss how we can avoid or a least
manage users workflow disruption within stable versions of our distro.
   


Heavily patch all TB 3.0 to act like TB 2.0? That seems silly, don't you 
think?


This is *not* the right forum. There is a right forum[1].

[1] 
http://www.mozilla.org/community/developer-forums.html#dev-apps-thunderbird


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

On 10/11/2009 09:45 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:

 So never ship beta software? That nixes a lot of Fedora packages.

Whether to include a beta or not should be decided on a case by case
basis. It is a good idea to avoid those but if there are substantial
benefits, it is fine. The focal point of the discussion isn't what it
originally include but how the software changes in updates. Do you use
thunderbird as your main mail client? If so, did you find the changes in
the update not disruptive for you?

 Heavily patch all TB 3.0 to act like TB 2.0? That seems silly, don't you
 think?
 
 This is *not* the right forum. There is a right forum[1].
 
 [1]
 http://www.mozilla.org/community/developer-forums.html#dev-apps-thunderbird

We aren't talking about upstream development however.  It is the
responsibility of the thunderbird package maintainers in Fedora to avoid
updates that prevents the mail client from being usable for a
substantial amount of time and changes the UI in a unexplained way. The
modifications required to avoid those would have been rather simple.

Rahul

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-11 Thread Matej Cepl

Rahul Sundaram, Sun, 11 Oct 2009 14:24:53 +0530:
 It was ok to ship a beta release of thunderbird but updates shouldn't
 cause such issues. If the fixes were necessary to push as updates then
 it would have prudent to disable smart folders and indexing by
 default and leave it enabled in Fedora 12.

Rahul, aren't you arguing that Rawhide is broken?

Matěj

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?


On 10/11/2009 11:19 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:

Whether to include a beta or not should be decided on a case by case
basis. It is a good idea to avoid those but if there are substantial
benefits, it is fine. The focal point of the discussion isn't what it
originally include but how the software changes in updates. Do you use
thunderbird as your main mail client? If so, did you find the changes in
the update not disruptive for you?
   


I do use TB (read my email headers). I fully understood that TB 3.0 was 
in beta and could drastically change at any moment. I keep track of 
their development as well so I was prepared for the changes that have 
happened. If you expect beta software to act like stable software then 
you need to update your dictionary.




We aren't talking about upstream development however.  It is the
responsibility of the thunderbird package maintainers in Fedora to avoid
updates that prevents the mail client from being usable for a
substantial amount of time and changes the UI in a unexplained way. The
modifications required to avoid those would have been rather simple.

   


The TB 3.0 updates have been sitting in updates-testing for at least a 
week or so before they are released into updates. The karma being 
received has been overwhelmingly *positive* so it's one or two 
conservative folks that really dislike change that voice their opinions 
and get some attention for the sake of attention.



--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

On 10/11/2009 10:02 PM, Matej Cepl wrote:
 Rahul Sundaram, Sun, 11 Oct 2009 14:24:53 +0530:
 It was ok to ship a beta release of thunderbird but updates shouldn't
 cause such issues. If the fixes were necessary to push as updates then
 it would have prudent to disable smart folders and indexing by
 default and leave it enabled in Fedora 12.
 
 Rahul, aren't you arguing that Rawhide is broken?

I don't see where I am arguing for that.

Rahul

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

2009-10-11 Thread Matej Cepl

Matej Cepl, Sun, 11 Oct 2009 16:32:26 +:

 Rahul Sundaram, Sun, 11 Oct 2009 14:24:53 +0530:
 It was ok to ship a beta release of thunderbird but updates shouldn't
 cause such issues. If the fixes were necessary to push as updates then
 it would have prudent to disable smart folders and indexing by
 default and leave it enabled in Fedora 12.
 
 Rahul, aren't you arguing that Rawhide is broken?

Sorry, misread your message. Forget about this please.

Matěj

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?

On 10/11/2009 10:03 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:

 I do use TB (read my email headers). I fully understood that TB 3.0 was
 in beta and could drastically change at any moment. I keep track of
 their development as well so I was prepared for the changes that have
 happened. If you expect beta software to act like stable software then
 you need to update your dictionary.

Oh please. Expecting all Fedora thunderbird users to keep track of
upstream development of software included in Fedora is totally
ridiculous. The package maintainer made the judgement to include a beta
release of thunderbird. If major UI or other behaviour changes were
expected to follow in later revisions, it would have been wise to not
include the beta release in the first place. Otherwise, it would have
been easy enough to disable those couple of features we are talking
about in the update and avoid the hassle for users.

It is NOT ok if I update my mail client in any stable release of Fedora
and get a different UI where my folders are rearranged and my mail
client proceeds to index gigabytes of my mail sucking up the CPU and
generally making it unusable for quite sometime. A new release with a
new UI and behaviour is ok. An update changing it like this is
definitely not.

Rahul

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?


On 10/11/2009 11:46 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:

Oh please. Expecting all Fedora thunderbird users to keep track of
upstream development of software included in Fedora is totally
ridiculous. The package maintainer made the judgement to include a beta
release of thunderbird. If major UI or other behaviour changes were
expected to follow in later revisions, it would have been wise to not
include the beta release in the first place. Otherwise, it would have
been easy enough to disable those couple of features we are talking
about in the update and avoid the hassle for users.
   


Did I say that people should do exactly as I do? No. Please don't put 
words in my mouth.




It is NOT ok if I update my mail client in any stable release of Fedora
and get a different UI where my folders are rearranged and my mail
client proceeds to index gigabytes of my mail sucking up the CPU and
generally making it unusable for quite sometime. A new release with a
new UI and behaviour is ok. An update changing it like this is
definitely not.
   


Then were was your negative karma? I run TB on 3 different machines 
(different platforms/arches) and have not encountered any disastrous 
side effects so my positive karma does not accurately reflect all 
possible scenarios.


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Re: thunderbird upgrade - wtf?