New bodhi release in production

[Adam Williamson]

On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 01:37 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
> > As several people have pointed out, there's a fundamental inconsistency
> > in your position - you can't simultaneously claim that lots of people
> > are frothing at the mouth for new releases of KDE, but it's really hard
> > to find anyone to test the updates. If there's so many people who want
> > KDE updates, it shouldn't be hard to find *two* people (just one of whom
> > has to be a proven tester) to test the updates before they get pushed.
> 
> In theory that may be so. In practice, finding karma is extremely hard. 
> Users do not give karma on Bodhi. They do not even have a FAS account and 
> are not interested in signing up for one. It's just how things are.

But there's two of you KDE developers posting in this thread. The two of
you together are enough to get any update approved, if one of you takes
ten minutes to go through the proven testers application process:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Proven_tester

(Admittedly, yeah, +1ing an update you did yourself is bad form. But
surely there's more than two people on the KDE team?)

> I've been soliciting for karma for this update:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/kdevelop-4.0.0-3.fc14
> on #fedora-kde. It's a straight rebuild, it doesn't really need ANY testing 
> at all. It got only karma 2, and one of those was mine (the update was 
> submitted by somebody else, so it's not a self-vote). The update was 
> submitted (again: not by me) with a stablekarma of 3. 

Then advise the KDE team to submit updates with a lower threshold.
Admittedly, the Bodhi defaults here could stand to be improved; I don't
think using the 'auto push' karma threshold as 'approved' makes sense,
I'd like to see non-critpath updates require simple +1 karma to be
'approved'. But that is, again, just a minor bug in the current system,
not any kind of showstopper.

> Over 5 days have 
> passed now. The repeated claims that those karma requirements are a pure 
> formality are a LIE. 

Please don't set up straw men. I've said it is not an onerous system,
that it is not as strict as the RHEL system...I haven't said it's a pure
formality.

> In practice this update is unlikely to get to +3 before 
> the 7 day timeout, and if it does, it'll just be because of this message and 
> I do not believe that nagging the devel ML for each update is going to 
> scale!

No, it doesn't, but for important updates that are stuck, you can
certainly nag -test. And, see above. The +3 requirement is nothing set
in stone, you can already change it, and we should probably change the
default. Nothing in my mail said anything about the non-critpath default
but changeable +3 requirement, I talked about the critpath unchangeable
+1/+1 requirement.

> (And in addition, 5 days is already too long. Though in this 
> particular case the neverending Alpha freeze would have kept it from going 
> out to stable anyway, but that's just another broken process.)

In what way is it broken? The freeze isn't neverending, it lasts as long
as it takes to release the Alpha. We can hardly start shoving packages
into stable until we sign off on the Alpha images, that breaks the whole
point of the freeze.

>  And 
> thankfully this one is not critical path, so at least there IS a timeout 
> here! Some stuff, e.g. kdelibs, has been arbitrarily termed "critical path" 
> (FESCo forced KDE SIG to provide them a list of "critical" packages, even 
> though our position was clear: we do not see a use for this process for KDE 
> at all!) and will get stuck in testing even longer, potentially forever.
> 
> > Really, if you want to have anyone from the KDE team apply to be a
> > proven tester, I will sponsor their application personally. It's not
> > intended to be a hard process to use.
> 
> Rex Dieter has applied months ago, before the initial seeding even happened.
> https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/75
> He is still not in the group.

I replied to his application on July 7th - the day we started actually
accepting proven tester applicants - asking him for the things we ask of
all applicants (affirm that they've read and will abide by the
guidelines for proven testers). He has not yet replied to that, so I
can't approve him.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net