Review Request 57: Multiple builds fixing a bug show confusing status label

[Martin Krizek]

> On Dec. 10, 2013, 5:58 p.m., Tim Flink wrote:
> > blockerbugs/models/update.py, line 55
> > <http://reviewboard-tflink.rhcloud.com/r/57/diff/1/?file=1607#file1607line55>
> >
> >     Why is this sort order change an improvement? If an older update is pending while a newer update is stable, we'd want to show the newer update
> 
> Martin Krizek wrote:
>     But wouldn't the older update be marked as obsolete?
> 
> Tim Flink wrote:
>     It should be but for example, if you look at the tracking app right now, there are 2 anaconda/blivet updates - one of which has been deleted in bodhi but still shows up.
>     
>     This issue was supposed to be fixed but obviously, it's not. Filed as https://phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org/T27
>     
>     I think that the problem of phantom updates are the root cause of the problem as reported, but I'll ask in bug to be sure.
> 
> Tim Flink wrote:
>     After re-reading the bug, I stand corrected. That was a completely different issue than I was thinking about in my head.
>     
>     I don't like sorting on string fields by default but I also don't see much of a way around it unless we changed the schema to use status enums instead of strings.
>     
>     Go ahead and push to develop. We might want to look into changing the update status field to an enum but that's well outside the scope of this fix.

I know. This is just a part of the fix, the rest will be in https://phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org/T21 as I mentioned in the fix description. Should have probably done it in one review, sorry for confusion.


- Martin


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviewboard-tflink.rhcloud.com/r/57/#review118
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Dec. 10, 2013, 3:54 p.m., Martin Krizek wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://reviewboard-tflink.rhcloud.com/r/57/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Dec. 10, 2013, 3:54 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for blockerbugs.
> 
> 
> Bugs: 438
>     https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ticket/438
> 
> 
> Repository: blockerbugs
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> commit 911781af9cc06e27c0a8580f07f7673c90e7329d
> Author: Martin Krizek <mkrizek at redhat.com>
> Date:   Tue Dec 10 16:28:52 2013 +0100
> 
>     Sort updates by (status.desc(), pending.desc())
>     
>     This way an update label is correctly set when multiple updates fix a
>     bug. The label is chosen by the following order (the lowest one):
>     
>     pending testing < testing < pending stable < stable
>     
>     Fixes: #438
> 
> Note: the rest of the issues with displaying label is handled outside this ticket in https://phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org/T21
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   blockerbugs/models/update.py 89c083da5c91558d4dead118c67e4a1138b8cae1 
>   blockerbugs/controllers/main.py 1795ed1d717bb85e0f3d9e7e7008d68c2aae36d8 
>   blockerbugs/__init__.py dcf6c5aadb24e6d86e95d5bb3d608b81721de47f 
> 
> Diff: http://reviewboard-tflink.rhcloud.com/r/57/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Sorting seems to be working as expected.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Martin Krizek
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/qa-devel/attachments/20131211/788d8ac3/attachment.html>