On ke, 18 joulu 2019, David Cantrell wrote:
On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 03:34:34PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote:
>On Wed, Dec 18, 2019, 14:29 Alexander Bokovoy <abokovoy(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
>>On ke, 18 joulu 2019, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>>>Vít Ondruch wrote:
>>>> Also, it is interesting that AFAIK, we have not yet dealt with issue
>>>> like this (i.e. reporting issues against specific streams) for RHEL8
>>yet.
>>>
>>>How can Modularity have been forced to production in both Fedora and RHEL
>>>without something as basic as this figured out? Inability to report bugs
>>>against the software you ship should be considered a showstopper,
>>ESPECIALLY
>>>for a distribution calling itself "Enterprise".
>>>
>>>It is also no surprise that you are not seeing any complaints about
>>>Modularity if you do not provide a place to report them to.
>>
>
>(snip)
>
>
>>You still report against a particular package. Hopefully, also providing
>>the package version (rpm -q). Since that output for a modular package
>>uniquely identifies a module build, information about the exact stream can
>>be looked up from the MBS.
>>
>>For example, if you have thunderbird-68.3.1-1.module_f31+7237+88bd0ff3
>>installed and want to report its issues, that would be module build
>>7237:
>>
>>https://release-engineering.github.io/mbs-ui/module/7237
>>
>>Which has NSVC thunderbird:master:3120191217131320:802922d1, e.g.
>>thunderbird:master stream of the thunderbird module.
>>
>
>And how should users know how to do that? Every UI and workflow and tool we
>have in fedora defaults to reporting bugz against "Fedora" product with
>"$SRCNAME" component. Which is for non-modular packages, and assigns to
>non-modular maintainers.
For non-technical users this process is not easily discoverable and too
complicated. For technical users it leaves too many open questions since the
reporting it mixed in with regular packages.
This does tie by to one of my original questions about how do users determine
what modules are installed and what packages are provided by those modules.
We lack tooling for that.
Right. Tools are missing. It would be good to have this integrated with
abrtd, for example. And may be have some way on a bugzilla side to pick
up data based on an rpm package name, pulling most of the metadata it
could from MBS systems.
--
/ Alexander Bokovoy
Sr. Principal Software Engineer
Security / Identity Management Engineering
Red Hat Limited, Finland