Change freeze request: Fix invalid login pages

[Michael Yingbull]

I'd go with #2.


2008/4/15 Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger at gmail.com>:

> When I built the last python-fedora, I built the package in my working
> tree instead of making a fresh branch.  This means the python-fedora package
> I deployed on Friday has some incompatible changes that weren't meant to go
> in until the next release.  This is leading people to get an internal server
> error when they try to login with an invalid username/password.
>
> There's two options: spin a new package based off the actual
> python-fedora-0.2.99.8.  The diff for that would look like
> bzr-0.2.99.8-current.patch.
>
> The alternative is to only fix the problem that we know we're having with
> BaseClient.  The patch for that is quite a bit smaller:  it's just a few
> lines to change exception handling in fas2.py and jsonfasprovider.py to use
> the new exception hierarchy in BaseClient.
>
> Risk for option #1: we have had the new python-fedora deployed since
> Friday and this is the only problem reported so far.  The patch is bigger
> than for option #2 and thus there's more room for unexpected problems.
>
> Risk for option #2: We definitely do not want to push this package out to
> the other servers as it's likely to break error handling in clients because
> of the new exception hierarchy.  Since we're in change freeze we're not
> likely to do that for a while.
>
> I'm inclined for option #2.  What do others think?
>
> -Toshio
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
> Fedora-infrastructure-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/infrastructure/attachments/20080415/aa71d4b1/attachment.html