New bodhi bugfix release in production
awilliam at redhat.com
Tue Oct 25 22:17:32 UTC 2011
On Tue, 2011-10-25 at 16:10 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 14:59:51 -0700
> Adam Williamson <awilliam at redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2011-10-25 at 17:18 -0400, Luke Macken wrote:
> > > bodhi v0.8.3
> > > ============
> > >
> > > Yesterday I pushed out a new bugfix release of bodhi into
> > > production. The bodhi-client is currently on it's way to
> > > updates-testing for all releases.
> > > Server fixes
> > > ------------
> > >
> > > - Default to update ID-based URLs
> > > https://fedorahosted.org/bodhi/ticket/632
> > In case you hadn't noticed, response to this has so far been pretty
> > negative. It seems people liked being able to tell from the URL what
> > the update actually *was*. I must admit I do to. I've resorted to
> > creating the 'old-style' URLs manually when I do lists of updates on
> > test@ or in trac, now.
> Please read down...
> > Masher fixes
> > ------------
> > - Updates-testing report emails should use package names not update
> > number https://fedorahosted.org/bodhi/ticket/644
> But see the test list... there's an issue with the new package name
> based links. ;)
It's not just the updates-testing list, though. When I go to the web
interface, search for updates to, say, grub2, get a list, and click on
one of the results, I get an ID-based URL, not a package name-based one.
I then paste that into an email, IRC conversation, or trac compose
request ticket, and no-one can see what the update *is* unless they
click on the link.
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
More information about the devel