New package/branch procedure w/ pkgdb2

[Pierre-Yves Chibon]

On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 05:04:26PM +0200, Thomas Spura wrote:
>    2014-07-15 16:35 GMT+02:00 Pierre-Yves Chibon <pingou at pingoured.fr>:
> 
>      New procedure (1)
>      =================
> 
>      * packager opens a review-request on bugzilla
>      * reviewer sets the fedora-review flag to ?
>      * reviewer does the review
>      * reviewer sets the fedora-review flag to +
>      * packager goes to pkgdb2 to request new package
>      A  - precises package name
>      A  - precises package summary
>      A  - precises package branches
>      A  - precises link to review on bugzilla
>      * requests added to the scm admin queue
>      * cvsadmin checks the review (check reviewer is a packagerA^1)
>      * cvsadmin approves the creation of the package in pkgdb
>      * package creation is broadcasted on fedmsg
>      * git adjusted automatically
> 
>      A^1 we could check this automatically by checking which comment mentions
>      'approved'
>      and checking who set the fedora-review flag to +
> 
>      New procedure (2) A - Relies on fedmsg/bugzilla integration
>      =================
> 
>      * packager opens a review-request on bugzilla
>      * reviewer sets the fedora-review flag to ?
>      * reviewer does the review
>      * reviewer sets the fedora-review flag to +
>      * automatically set fedora-cvs flag to ?
>      * cvsadmin checks the review (check reviewer is a packager)
>      * cvsadmin sets the fedora-cvs flag to +
>      * flag change is broadcasted onto fedmsg
>      * pkgdb automatically creates the package (w/ name and summary provided
>      in the
>      A  review)
> 
>    How does pkgdb know the fas name of the packager? By the email of the
>    reporter?

The email would be the way indeed. We do require packager to have the same email
in FAS and bugzilla and the admins get an hourly message when someone doesn't.

>    Maybe pkgdb2 could wait for the packager to approve the automatically
>    filled values and then could kick off, when the packager confirms?

The idea is that summary will be updated via a cron taking the info from yum
anyway, so, if there was a typo in the summary, fixing it in the spec file will
fix it in pkgdb.

>    This could then be merged with the next item below
>    A 
> 
>      * packager goes to pkgdb2 to request new branches

Merging validating name/summary with requesting new branches is possible, but it
will make things a little more complex as my idea is that this part of the
process would/could be used when requesting additional branches on an existing
package.

>    Why is there a second check of an cvsadmin needed, when a new branch is
>    created by the "Main Contact" of the new package?

That is the same check as the one we do already when requesting new branches

>    Shouldn't it be enough, to check above, if the review was sane with
>    setting fedora-cvs to +?
> 
>    Another possibility would be to remove anything from above with
>    "fedora-cvs" and only one check of an cvsadmin below would be required.

One advantage of keeping fedora-cvs is that it gives us the flexibility when/if
we miss or fedmsg drops a message.
But, we could consider it as well, I just seems to remember that Dennis wanted
to keep it in at the meeting.

> 
>      * requests added to the scm admin queue
>      * cvsadmin approves the creation of the branches in pkgdb
>      * branch creation is broadcasted on fedmsg
>      * git adjusted automatically

Pierre