UsrMove feature breaking "yum upgrade" upgrades from older releases to F17?

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 09:25:31AM +0000, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 1:34 AM, Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > IIRC from the discussion in FPC meetings, there should be a way to make yum
> > upgrades work but you'd first have to boot up specially and run an initial
> > upgrade script:
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upgrading_Fedora_using_yum#Fedora_16_-.3E_Fedora_17
> 
> How does that work on headless devices? It doesn't seem to be well
> tested. In fact there doesn't seem to be a way to be able to test it.
> 
To test --
1) install F16.
2) Run through procedure outlined on wiki (once the Feature Owners fill in
the blanks)
3) Se if you then have a working F17 system

For headless devices I do not know -- you'll need the Feature Owners to
answer that one.

> This should have been in rawhide months ago. This is just asking for
> slippage of the schedule.
> 
Yeah, I agree that rawhide is for breakage and things should land as early
as possible... but lots of people don't agree.  I'm guessing that the
Feature process is going to need to change to accomodate them rather than
the other way around.

> IMO this is too late and there's too many widely impacting things that
> haven't been widely announced. Personally I think, similar to what
> happened in F-14 with systemd, this feature should be pushed back to
> F-18 to give the feature developers more time to properly develop and
> test things like those scripts or decent procedures in order to be
> able to progress this properly rather than throwing it over the fence
> a week or so before feature freeze/branch and ensuring a just about
> guaranteed slip of the schedule.
> 
> This just makes a whole mockery of the Feature process and basically
> gives the idea that a number of people thing they can just do as they
> please, when they please and ride rough shod over the process.
> 
Please file a fesco meeting ticket.

> > I also agree with your point that this discussion should be reflected on the
> > Feature page (Since the Feature page is where marketing material is taken
> > from).  Could that be updated as well?
> 
> It's also where a lot of people go to figure out the impact and how
> they can test various features. There's not a single mention of "yum
> upgrade" breakage or change of process.
>
+1

-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20120126/235385bb/attachment.sig>