Proposed package blocking due to FTBFS

[Bastien Nocera]

On Tue, 2010-12-07 at 18:12 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Dec 2010 01:05:06 +0000
> Bastien Nocera <bnocera at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> ...snip...
> 
> > >   The
> > > lists may be broken down by when they last did build.  With 3
> > > exceptions, these 110 bugs are all still in NEW state as well, so
> > > they haven't had much maintainer love in quite some time (6-18
> > > months).
> > 
> > All the Fedora bugzilla bugs assigned to you, ever:
> > http://bit.ly/dTndTs
> > A whole 73.
> > 
> > Fedora Bugzilla bugs in NEW or ASSIGNED assigned to me:
> > http://bit.ly/gBtVRP
> > 810 bugs.
> > 
> > When you deal with as many bugs as I (or some other people) do can you
> > take executive decisions on blocking packages in newer revisions.
> 
> How about asking for help? 
> Co-maintainers on packages that get lots of bugs? 
> Have you considered training up some bugzappers to help triage your
> components? They could at least work on de-duping abrt reports. 
> 
> Lets try and get you help... 
> 
> > I bet most of those packages are still functional, and fail to build
> > due to some minor changes in the build system, or breakage in
> > dependency libraries.
> 
> The ones he's refering to have not built since f12. It's a wonder if
> they work at all. ;) 

Well, they probably did, or at least I didn't get any reports saying
they don't.

> > <snip>
> > > ModemManager-0.4-4.git20100720.fc14 [u'631152 NEW'] (build/make)
> > > dcbw NetworkManager-openvpn-0.8.1-1.fc14 [u'631111 NEW']
> > > (build/make) dcbw,choeger,huzaifas,steve
> > > NetworkManager-vpnc-0.8.1-1.fc14 [u'631194 NEW'] (build/make) dcbw
> > 
> > And I'm guessing this list didn't get read by humans either.
> 
> You are refering to the wrong list. 

>From Matt:
"
I would like to propose blocking packages at the F15 alpha compose
point if they have not resolved their FTBFS from F14 or earlier.
"

So that means that those packages would have gotten blocked.

> That was a list of all things that don't currently build right now in
> rawhide. The proposed block list was much smaller and contained things
> that have not been built since f12. 

Again, that's not what's mentioned above.

> > Feel free to insert here complaints about how the Red Hat bugzilla is
> > slow, bad at reporting, and that abrt reports with missing
> > attachments, poor backtraces and no support for tools like GNOME
> > Bugzilla's simple-dup-finedr aren't helping us keep the bug count
> > down.
> 
> I'm intrigued. Can we modify 'simple-dup-finder' to work on our
> bugzilla? Any docs or pointers to what it does?

GNOME's dup finder:
http://git.gnome.org/browse/bugzilla-newer/tree/dupfinder

The README is probably outdated, as per:
http://live.gnome.org/BugzillaUpgrade/UpgradeStatus#Simple-dup-finder

KDE and a number of other bugzillas seem to have similar infrastructure.
I'm pretty sure it wouldn't work due to abrt's use of attachments
instead of full backtraces.

Also sorely missing from the RH bugzilla is an equivalent to the
"browse" functionality in the GNOME BZ:
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/browse.cgi

And the fact that NEEDINFO is a real status, not a flag, which makes it
easier to filter.