On Wed, 2022-07-13 at 19:49 +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote:
On Wed, Jul 13, 2022 at 7:32 PM Maxwell G via devel
<devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
> On 22/07/13 08:58AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > It's also where we usually route *manual* testing feedback. If people
> > can't comment and karma a Bodhi update, where can they test this big
> > and very-potentially-destabilizing change?
>
> The go rebuilds in question are not very destabilizing, and they don't
> have breaking changes. The packages are simply getting rebuilt against
> the new go minor version with fixes for the CVE(s). I've already had to
> waive the tests, as they timed out when trying to download the 300+
> packages in the update.
I wonder if it would have made sense to have submitted those 300+
builds in separate bodhi updates (at least in several smaller batches,
if not individually)?
At least in this case, that would've been a little bit more work, but
would have caused less of a chance to break bodhi.
As far as I can tell, there's no reason the builds need to be handled
together, as the only thing that ties these builds together is the
*reason* why they were rebuilt, but they don't necessary need to be
pushed to testing or stable as a single unit.
If they need to be rebuilt for an API/ABI change, then by policy they
should be grouped together. We do not want a situation where the
API/ABI change gets pushed stable but some of the rebuilds do not, or
vice versa.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA
IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha
https://www.happyassassin.net