8:42 a.m.
I'm inclined to drop the "bug-url is required" for engine stable branch
3.4, until we GA 3.4, as a lot of the patches are for pre-GA features.
3.3 stable branch still has this requirement of course.
thoughts anyone?
Thanks,
Itamar
8:51 a.m.
+1
I think it will also speed up the backport of various critical fixes to 3.4
discovered before GA for which there is no BZ created.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>
To: "engine-devel" <engine-devel(a)ovirt.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2014 3:42:17 PM
Subject: [Engine-devel] bug-url requirement for stable branch backports
I'm inclined to drop the "bug-url is required" for engine stable branch
3.4, until we GA 3.4, as a lot of the patches are for pre-GA features.
3.3 stable branch still has this requirement of course.
thoughts anyone?
Thanks,
Itamar
_______________________________________________
Engine-devel mailing list
Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
8:53 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>
To: "engine-devel" <engine-devel(a)ovirt.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2014 4:42:17 PM
Subject: [Engine-devel] bug-url requirement for stable branch backports
I'm inclined to drop the "bug-url is required" for engine stable branch
3.4, until we GA 3.4, as a lot of the patches are for pre-GA features.
It was branched too soon.
Bugs should be mandatory post rc.
Well, if rc is truly release candidate.
Up to now rc was just another beta.
3.3 stable branch still has this requirement of course.
thoughts anyone?
Thanks,
Itamar
_______________________________________________
Engine-devel mailing list
Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
8:55 a.m.
I think it will help stabilizing the new features in a short circle,
sometimes there are small "fine tuning" fixes that don't have bugs
opened for them and the flow is easier if you can just backport them
without opening a bug.
On 01/30/2014 04:42 PM, Itamar Heim wrote:
I'm inclined to drop the "bug-url is required" for
engine stable
branch 3.4, until we GA 3.4, as a lot of the patches are for pre-GA
features.
3.3 stable branch still has this requirement of course.
thoughts anyone?
Thanks,
Itamar
_______________________________________________
Engine-devel mailing list
Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
11:14 a.m.
On Thu, 30 Jan 2014, Tal Nisan wrote:
I think it will help stabilizing the new features in a short circle,
sometimes
there are small "fine tuning" fixes that don't have bugs opened for them
and
the flow is easier if you can just backport them without opening a bug.
On 01/30/2014 04:42 PM, Itamar Heim wrote:
> I'm inclined to drop the "bug-url is required" for engine stable
branch 3.4,
until we GA 3.4, as a lot of the patches are for pre-GA features.
I took Alon's comment as a -1, and do not understand the flow
difficulty
Cloning a bug is a click and a bit of web trimming. Adding it
as a dependency on its parent is typing a bug number in the
proper field. It is very hard, unless sone follows both
mailing lists, and commit mailing lists, to figure out some
changes and if this is a backport (and not: "stabilizing the
new features" as Tal mentions)
The thrashing in stabilization, and very fast gerrit approvals
on the cpopen patch (it happened in hours, months ago) show
the need to be explaining to a Bugzilla, what is happening.
As near as I can tell the package succession is still not
'right' for upgrades [It seems to need a manual exclude in a
yum repo config in one place, OR a manual Provides, OR an
epoched EVR (!! NOT RECOMMENDED !!)]
-1
-- Russ herrold
11:17 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "R P Herrold" <herrold(a)owlriver.com>
To: "Tal Nisan" <tnisan(a)redhat.com>
Cc: "engine-devel" <engine-devel(a)ovirt.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2014 7:14:34 PM
Subject: [Engine-devel] bug-url requirement for stable branch backports
On Thu, 30 Jan 2014, Tal Nisan wrote:
> I think it will help stabilizing the new features in a short circle,
> sometimes
> there are small "fine tuning" fixes that don't have bugs opened for
them
> and
> the flow is easier if you can just backport them without opening a bug.
>
> On 01/30/2014 04:42 PM, Itamar Heim wrote:
> > I'm inclined to drop the "bug-url is required" for engine stable
branch
> > 3.4,
>
> until we GA 3.4, as a lot of the patches are for pre-GA features.
I took Alon's comment as a -1, and do not understand the flow
difficulty
No, I am for enforcing real bugs only since rc.
Thus in favour of dropping this now.
I am consistence to what I recommended in past (pre-3.3) as well.
Cloning a bug is a click and a bit of web trimming. Adding it
as a dependency on its parent is typing a bug number in the
proper field. It is very hard, unless sone follows both
mailing lists, and commit mailing lists, to figure out some
changes and if this is a backport (and not: "stabilizing the
new features" as Tal mentions)
The thrashing in stabilization, and very fast gerrit approvals
on the cpopen patch (it happened in hours, months ago) show
the need to be explaining to a Bugzilla, what is happening.
As near as I can tell the package succession is still not
'right' for upgrades [It seems to need a manual exclude in a
yum repo config in one place, OR a manual Provides, OR an
epoched EVR (!! NOT RECOMMENDED !!)]
-1
-- Russ herrold
_______________________________________________
Engine-devel mailing list
Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
3:29 a.m.
Il 30/01/2014 18:17, Alon Bar-Lev ha scritto:
----- Original Message -----
> From: "R P Herrold" <herrold(a)owlriver.com>
> To: "Tal Nisan" <tnisan(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: "engine-devel" <engine-devel(a)ovirt.org>
> Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2014 7:14:34 PM
> Subject: [Engine-devel] bug-url requirement for stable branch backports
>
> On Thu, 30 Jan 2014, Tal Nisan wrote:
>
>> I think it will help stabilizing the new features in a short circle,
>> sometimes
>> there are small "fine tuning" fixes that don't have bugs opened for
them
>> and
>> the flow is easier if you can just backport them without opening a bug.
>>
>> On 01/30/2014 04:42 PM, Itamar Heim wrote:
>>> I'm inclined to drop the "bug-url is required" for engine
stable branch
>>> 3.4,
>>
>> until we GA 3.4, as a lot of the patches are for pre-GA features.
>
> I took Alon's comment as a -1, and do not understand the flow
> difficulty
No, I am for enforcing real bugs only since rc.
+1
Thus in favour of dropping this now.
I am consistence to what I recommended in past (pre-3.3) as well.
>
> Cloning a bug is a click and a bit of web trimming. Adding it
> as a dependency on its parent is typing a bug number in the
> proper field. It is very hard, unless sone follows both
> mailing lists, and commit mailing lists, to figure out some
> changes and if this is a backport (and not: "stabilizing the
> new features" as Tal mentions)
>
> The thrashing in stabilization, and very fast gerrit approvals
> on the cpopen patch (it happened in hours, months ago) show
> the need to be explaining to a Bugzilla, what is happening.
> As near as I can tell the package succession is still not
> 'right' for upgrades [It seems to need a manual exclude in a
> yum repo config in one place, OR a manual Provides, OR an
> epoched EVR (!! NOT RECOMMENDED !!)]
>
> -1
>
> -- Russ herrold
> _______________________________________________
> Engine-devel mailing list
> Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
>
_______________________________________________
Engine-devel mailing list
Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
--
Sandro Bonazzola
Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration.
See how it works at redhat.com
12:25 p.m.
On 01/30/2014 07:14 PM, R P Herrold wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jan 2014, Tal Nisan wrote:
> I think it will help stabilizing the new features in a short circle, sometimes
> there are small "fine tuning" fixes that don't have bugs opened for
them and
> the flow is easier if you can just backport them without opening a bug.
>
> On 01/30/2014 04:42 PM, Itamar Heim wrote:
>> I'm inclined to drop the "bug-url is required" for engine stable
branch 3.4,
>
> until we GA 3.4, as a lot of the patches are for pre-GA features.
I took Alon's comment as a -1, and do not understand the flow
difficulty
Cloning a bug is a click and a bit of web trimming. Adding it
as a dependency on its parent is typing a bug number in the
proper field. It is very hard, unless sone follows both
mailing lists, and commit mailing lists, to figure out some
changes and if this is a backport (and not: "stabilizing the
new features" as Tal mentions)
The thrashing in stabilization, and very fast gerrit approvals
on the cpopen patch (it happened in hours, months ago) show
the need to be explaining to a Bugzilla, what is happening.
As near as I can tell the package succession is still not
'right' for upgrades [It seems to need a manual exclude in a
yum repo config in one place, OR a manual Provides, OR an
epoched EVR (!! NOT RECOMMENDED !!)]
-1
cpopen was in vdsm, this is about engine repo.
backporting to stable branch has it overhead already. we forked early to
make sure we are stabilizing rather than getting more forward-looking
changes merged into master.
however, as alon said, in that regard we forked 'early'.
this incurs an overhead of backports already.
looking at the patches i see, which are for stabilization, not all of
them have a bug tracking them, and i don't see a reason forcing this for
pre-rc as the main benefit of forcing bugs is tracking changes for
release notes (that's to force creation of bugs post issues fixed, not
using bugs to track issues).
so if there is a bug, i expect it in bug-url for easier tracking, but i
don't see the value in forcing it pre-rc.
-- Russ herrold
10:14 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>
To: "engine-devel" <engine-devel(a)ovirt.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2014 4:42:17 PM
Subject: [Engine-devel] bug-url requirement for stable branch backports
I'm inclined to drop the "bug-url is required" for engine stable branch
3.4, until we GA 3.4, as a lot of the patches are for pre-GA features.
3.3 stable branch still has this requirement of course.
thoughts anyone?
+1
Thanks,
Itamar
_______________________________________________
Engine-devel mailing list
Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
11:34 p.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>
To: "engine-devel" <engine-devel(a)ovirt.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2014 4:42:17 PM
Subject: [Engine-devel] bug-url requirement for stable branch backports
I'm inclined to drop the "bug-url is required" for engine stable branch
3.4, until we GA 3.4, as a lot of the patches are for pre-GA features.
3.3 stable branch still has this requirement of course.
thoughts anyone?
+1
Thanks,
Itamar
_______________________________________________
Engine-devel mailing list
Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
3736
days inactive
3737
days old
9 comments
8 participants
participants (8)
-
Alon Bar-Lev -
Eli Mesika -
Itamar Heim -
Martin Betak -
R P Herrold -
Sandro Bonazzola -
Tal Nisan -
Yair Zaslavsky