Building and submitting updates for Fedora 20

[Tim Flink]

On Sun, 6 Oct 2013 19:27:33 +0200
Michael Schwendt <mschwendt at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 06 Oct 2013 19:11:41 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> 
> > I now see ... the version in f19 was greater than that in
> > f20+rawhide, for whatever reasons.
> > Actually, I wonder why AutoQA did not complain.
> 
> There are no AutoQA comments in that bodhi ticket at all. Almost as if
> AutoQA has not been run for that update. Normally it would add a
> comment also for PASSED tests.

Dan mentioned this later in the thread but I wanted to add a bit more
information.

There was a bug in AutoQA [1] that prevented comments on updates but
didn't interfere with the checks being run. That bug has been fixed but
most updates submitted before that fix was pushed to production on
2013-09-30 will probably not get comments from AutoQA until they are
submitted for stable and more checks are run.

[1] https://fedorahosted.org/autoqa/ticket/444

All of the results are available through the resultsdb frontend, though:

http://autoqa.fedoraproject.org/resultsdb/frontend

I can have all of the checks re-run for f18, f19 and f20
updates-testing to add the bodhi comments that should have been added
but I'd rather not spam maintainers unless there's enough desire to
have the comments in bodhi.

Tim
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20131006/2daf99ff/attachment.sig>