New bodhi bugfix release in production
lmacken at redhat.com
Wed Oct 26 23:45:53 UTC 2011
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 07:17:10PM -0400, Luke Macken wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 03:04:12PM -0700, Garrett Holmstrom wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Kevin Fenzi <kevin at scrye.com> wrote:
> > > Or perhaps even:
> > >
> > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-YYYY-NNNNN/package1-1.1.fc16,package2-1.1.fc16
> > >
> > > where anything after the FEDORA-YYYY-NNNNN doesn't matter, but could
> > > contain all the current packages in the update.
> > This sounds reasonable to me. How feasible is teaching bodhi to parse
> > that sort of URI that way?
> Very feasible :)
Of course, I pulled the git-push trigger too early, and the above
commit has a couple of issues, which have since been resolved.
Kevin Fenzi's suggestion for using /updates/<ID>/<builds> as a default
URL structure has been implemented. Since it only looks for the update
by the ID the builds can change and it will still take you to the
The update IDs are assigned when they are first pushed to testing, so
pending updates will still have the same /updates/<builds> URL that they
Thanks to everyone who contributed their ideas in this thread!
More information about the devel