[Bug 923564] Review Request: NetworkManager-ssh - NetworkManager VPN plugin for SSH

Sat Mar 30 14:41:23 UTC 2013

Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=923564

--- Comment #19 from Pavel Šimerda <psimerda at redhat.com> ---
(In reply to comment #16)
> If so, I'll try to target FC18, as I think the NetworkManager patch is tiny
> and could be implemented easily (it's not even a code change).

That's a good idea. Then we need to apply the fix for f18, f19 and rawhide.

> So say I want to open a bug report, what should be the topic? Any standard
> for the topic?
> 'NetworkManager-ssh dbus support in NetworkManager' with a target of FC18?

Exactly. It should be implied but it may be better to specify that you are
targetting to f18, f19 and rawhide.

> Then should I attach the suggested patch and hope that the maintainer will
> include it in the next build of NetworkManager on FC18?

Link to the commit is good enough:

http://cgit.freedesktop.org/NetworkManager/NetworkManager/commit/?id=edd1ebe8a0f6703f7863684566011e34a9715186

> Should I make this bug depend on the bug I'm going to open?

Yes.

> Many thanks Pavel. :)

I'm happy there's someone willing to extend the networking ecosystem :).

(In reply to comment #17)
> Hi Dan.
> 
> I think the best way we can proceed is to first bring this package to the
> devel branch,

I disagree.

> aka rawhide or f19, and then open the bug against f18, You can
> always ask a package change request, requesting a new branch 

This increases the bureaucratic burden but doesn't solve anything. It's as easy
to ask for patching rawhide NetworkManager as to ask for patching all branches.

> > A bit of a confusion about the changelog in the spec.
> > Say I have revision X which is last for the changelog, however revision Y,
> > which is newer is the version I want to build, if I build revision Y and the
> > last entry is revision X, rpmlint complains about it.
> > Hence I assume that in the changelog, the last entry should be of the commit
> > I currently build (which doesn't make any sense, because it's not the last
> > commit the spec was changed), correct me if I'm wrong.
> > So I've included an entry of:
> > '* Thu Mar 28 2013 Dan Fruehauf <malkodan at gmail.com> - 0.0.3-0.4.%{checkout}'
> > Any other entry will result in a rpmlint yielding an error. Please clarify
> > that issue for me.

When you bump your version/release, you should also add a changelog record. The
'rpmdev-bumpspec' from @fedora-packager will do that for you. You don't even
need to stuff everything in one commit. It is your choice which commit you use
for building. It will work in the same way with fedora git repositories.

Also please don't use your projects git branch for tracking of the fedora spec
file.

> The fedora package maintainers, must try and as far as possible to package
> the latest version of the package which owns.

This is not necessarily true. Often it's the latest released version. Often
it's one of known-working git snapshots.

> Btw, althought 0.0.3-0.4.%{checkout} is an elegant solution, is not allowed
> because in the changelog, macros are not acceptable

+1

You must have literal versions in your changelog or otherwise it wouldn't work
as a changelog.

> > Speaking of which, if you've found so many errors here, are you aware of the
> > status of NetworkManager and all of the rest of its plugins?
> 
> Let me know what is your decision on the branch you're going to take
> initially, outside the small changes that I suggest in this comment, I see
> the package acceptable for a formal review

+1

(In reply to comment #18)
> It's a bit like a chicken and egg.
> I'll just prepare a correct spec with the current date and the last revision.

Don't use your projects' source control to track the Fedora specfile and you'll
be fine.

> I might actually do it and provide patches since I know what has to be done
> more or less. I'll talk to the guys on #nm.

You can submit the patches upstream to NetworkManager bugzilla or
NetworkManager mailing list. If you find problems with the Fedora packages
themselves (problems in specfile, etc), use this bugzilla and the respective
package names.

> > Let me know what is your decision on the branch you're going to take
> > initially, outside the small changes that I suggest in this comment, I see
> > the package acceptable for a formal review
> > 
> Lets go rawhide then anyway. Hopefully we'll be quick enough to get it in to
> FC19 before its release?

You can do f18/f19/rawhide at once and be done with it.

> Spec URL: http://nm-ssh.cloudapp.net/NetworkManager-ssh.spec
> SRPM URL:
> http://nm-ssh.cloudapp.net/NetworkManager-ssh-0.0.3-0.5.20130330git0fe4747.
> fc18.src.rpm

Thanks!

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=CXbKZX5xB5&a=cc_unsubscribe