11:47 a.m.
Hi Haïkel,
Haïkel Guémar wrote:
Author: hguemar
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/python-mpd/F-10
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv27941
Modified Files:
python-mpd.spec sources
Log Message:
Updated to 0.2.1
Any reason to update this for F-10 (or any Fedora branches really), as
the only change upstream from 0.2.0 was to fix a minor bug on Windows?
The 0.2.1 release was made in June 2008 and we've lived without it
until now. ;)
--
Todd OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Now, now my good man, this is no time for making enemies.
-- Voltaire, on his deathbed in response to a priest asking that
he renounce Satan.
11:53 a.m.
New subject: rpms/python-mpd/F-10 python-mpd.spec,1.2,1.3 sources,1.2,1.3
I wrote:
Hi Haïkel,
Haïkel Guémar wrote:
> Author: hguemar
>
> Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/python-mpd/F-10
> In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv27941
>
> Modified Files:
> python-mpd.spec sources
> Log Message:
> Updated to 0.2.1
Any reason to update this for F-10 (or any Fedora branches really), as
the only change upstream from 0.2.0 was to fix a minor bug on Windows?
The 0.2.1 release was made in June 2008 and we've lived without it
until now. ;)
BTW, your email address has a typo in the %changelog. :/
--
Todd OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A facility for quotation covers the absence of original thought.
-- Peter Wimsey
2:56 p.m.
New subject: rpms/python-mpd/F-10 python-mpd.spec,1.2,1.3 sources,1.2,1.3
Le 25/10/2009 17:53, Todd Zullinger a écrit :
I wrote:
> Hi Haïkel,
>
> Haïkel Guémar wrote:
>> Author: hguemar
>>
>> Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/python-mpd/F-10
>> In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv27941
>>
>> Modified Files:
>> python-mpd.spec sources
>> Log Message:
>> Updated to 0.2.1
>
> Any reason to update this for F-10 (or any Fedora branches really), as
> the only change upstream from 0.2.0 was to fix a minor bug on Windows?
> The 0.2.1 release was made in June 2008 and we've lived without it
> until now. ;)
BTW, your email address has a typo in the %changelog. :/
Thank you, i'll fix this.
This is personal policy to always push latest stable unless it's broken,
since it wasn't critical, i had always delayed it.
Why i pushed the update on older branches ? Maintainers are asked to
support branches until EOL and it worked on my test VM.
Maybe, i'm just a bit maniacal. ;)
Did it break anything ? For the moment, updates are staging in testing,
i can unpush them if you think it's more appropriate. :)
H.
4:16 p.m.
New subject: rpms/python-mpd/F-10 python-mpd.spec,1.2,1.3 sources,1.2,1.3
Haïkel Guémar wrote:
This is personal policy to always push latest stable unless it's
broken,
since it wasn't critical, i had always delayed it.
Why i pushed the update on older branches ? Maintainers are asked to
support branches until EOL and it worked on my test VM.
Maybe, i'm just a bit maniacal. ;)
Did it break anything ? For the moment, updates are staging in testing,
i can unpush them if you think it's more appropriate. :)
Nope, nothing breaks AFAIK (mostly because nothing relevant to a
non-windows system changed, other than the version number). I was
just curious to know the reason for the update. Thanks.
--
Todd OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Man was made at the end of the week's work when God was tired.
-- Mark Twain
4:20 p.m.
New subject: rpms/python-mpd/F-10 python-mpd.spec,1.2,1.3 sources,1.2,1.3
Am Sonntag, den 25.10.2009, 20:56 +0100 schrieb Haïkel Guémar:
This is personal policy to always push latest stable unless it's
broken,
since it wasn't critical, i had always delayed it.
Why i pushed the update on older branches ? Maintainers are asked to
support branches until EOL and it worked on my test VM.
Maybe, i'm just a bit maniacal. ;)
Definitely. ;) To "support" does not mean to drown users in useless
updates. We had this discussions over and over again, please look for
the thread called "The updates firehose" back in June 2007.
Did it break anything ? For the moment, updates are staging in
testing,
i can unpush them if you think it's more appropriate. :)
In this case I think you really should unpush it. Not only for F-11 but
for F-11 as well, possibly F12 to. If this update doesn't fix anything
on Linux, then don't push it.
H.
Regards,
Christoph
4:28 p.m.
New subject: rpms/python-mpd/F-10 python-mpd.spec,1.2,1.3 sources,1.2,1.3
On Sun, 2009-10-25 at 22:20 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
Am Sonntag, den 25.10.2009, 20:56 +0100 schrieb Haïkel Guémar:
> This is personal policy to always push latest stable unless it's broken,
> since it wasn't critical, i had always delayed it.
> Why i pushed the update on older branches ? Maintainers are asked to
> support branches until EOL and it worked on my test VM.
> Maybe, i'm just a bit maniacal. ;)
Definitely. ;) To "support" does not mean to drown users in useless
updates. We had this discussions over and over again, please look for
the thread called "The updates firehose" back in June 2007.
> Did it break anything ? For the moment, updates are staging in testing,
> i can unpush them if you think it's more appropriate. :)
In this case I think you really should unpush it. Not only for F-11 but
for F-11 as well, possibly F12 to. If this update doesn't fix anything
on Linux, then don't push it.
Then you get bug from people expecting the latest version because you're
not up to date...
Come-on this is maintainer decision and as long as it doesn't break
anyone, leave it that way.
Pierre
4:31 p.m.
New subject: rpms/python-mpd/F-10 python-mpd.spec,1.2,1.3 sources,1.2,1.3
On Sun, 2009-10-25 at 22:28 +0100, Pierre-Yves wrote:
On Sun, 2009-10-25 at 22:20 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 25.10.2009, 20:56 +0100 schrieb Haïkel Guémar:
>
> > This is personal policy to always push latest stable unless it's broken,
> > since it wasn't critical, i had always delayed it.
> > Why i pushed the update on older branches ? Maintainers are asked to
> > support branches until EOL and it worked on my test VM.
> > Maybe, i'm just a bit maniacal. ;)
>
> Definitely. ;) To "support" does not mean to drown users in useless
> updates. We had this discussions over and over again, please look for
> the thread called "The updates firehose" back in June 2007.
>
> > Did it break anything ? For the moment, updates are staging in testing,
> > i can unpush them if you think it's more appropriate. :)
>
> In this case I think you really should unpush it. Not only for F-11 but
> for F-11 as well, possibly F12 to. If this update doesn't fix anything
> on Linux, then don't push it.
Then you get bug from people expecting the latest version because you're
not up to date...
Come-on this is maintainer decision and as long as it doesn't break
anyone, leave it that way.
err s/anyone/anything/, sorry
Pierre
4:38 p.m.
New subject: rpms/python-mpd/F-10 python-mpd.spec,1.2,1.3 sources,1.2,1.3
On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 22:28:58 +0100, Pierre-Yves wrote:
Then you get bug from people expecting the latest version because
you're
not up to date...
Ridiculous. It's easy to close such tickets as NOTABUG and explain to such
people why an update doesn't make sense.
4:32 p.m.
New subject: rpms/python-mpd/F-10 python-mpd.spec,1.2,1.3 sources,1.2,1.3
On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 22:20:59 +0100, Christoph wrote:
Am Sonntag, den 25.10.2009, 20:56 +0100 schrieb Haïkel Guémar:
> This is personal policy to always push latest stable unless it's broken,
> since it wasn't critical, i had always delayed it.
> Why i pushed the update on older branches ? Maintainers are asked to
> support branches until EOL and it worked on my test VM.
> Maybe, i'm just a bit maniacal. ;)
Definitely. ;) To "support" does not mean to drown users in useless
updates. We had this discussions over and over again, please look for
the thread called "The updates firehose" back in June 2007.
> Did it break anything ? For the moment, updates are staging in testing,
> i can unpush them if you think it's more appropriate. :)
In this case I think you really should unpush it. Not only for F-11 but
for F-11 as well, possibly F12 to. If this update doesn't fix anything
on Linux, then don't push it.
And once again, the bodhi update requests for these updates don't try to
explain what changes come with these updates. They are only marked as "bug
fix" updates with no notes that give details.
4:55 p.m.
New subject: rpms/python-mpd/F-10 python-mpd.spec,1.2,1.3 sources,1.2,1.3
Michael Schwendt wrote:
And once again, the bodhi update requests for these updates don't
try to
explain what changes come with these updates. They are only marked as "bug
fix" updates with no notes that give details.
Right, we really need some enforcement against this practice.
I have no issues with updates getting pushed (unless they're as useless as
this one), but I do want to know what changed!
And a hint: if you don't know what to fill in, ask yourself whether the
update is worth pushing at all. (But don't refuse to push something just
because you're too lazy to fill in the update details, either!)
Kevin Kofler
4:39 p.m.
New subject: rpms/python-mpd/F-10 python-mpd.spec,1.2,1.3 sources,1.2,1.3
Le 25/10/2009 22:20, Christoph Wickert a écrit :
Am Sonntag, den 25.10.2009, 20:56 +0100 schrieb Haïkel Guémar:
> This is personal policy to always push latest stable unless it's broken,
> since it wasn't critical, i had always delayed it.
> Why i pushed the update on older branches ? Maintainers are asked to
> support branches until EOL and it worked on my test VM.
> Maybe, i'm just a bit maniacal. ;)
Definitely. ;) To "support" does not mean to drown users in useless
updates. We had this discussions over and over again, please look for
the thread called "The updates firehose" back in June 2007.
> Did it break anything ? For the moment, updates are staging in testing,
> i can unpush them if you think it's more appropriate. :)
In this case I think you really should unpush it. Not only for F-11 but
for F-11 as well, possibly F12 to. If this update doesn't fix anything
on Linux, then don't push it.
> H.
Regards,
Christoph
This was a very very low priority task for me, python-mpd is roughly one
python file mpd.py. There was only one use-case, i could think about :
an unexperienced developer including it in his "multiplatform" project.
Then, he shares it with his friend under windows (nobody is perfect) and
bang it fails!
Since, this is so controversial, i'll just let them rot on testing, then
end of discussion.
Best regards,
H.
4:57 p.m.
New subject: rpms/python-mpd/F-10 python-mpd.spec,1.2,1.3 sources,1.2,1.3
Haïkel Guémar wrote:
This was a very very low priority task for me, python-mpd is roughly
one
python file mpd.py. There was only one use-case, i could think about :
an unexperienced developer including it in his "multiplatform" project.
People bundling system libraries deserve whatever they get. We definitely
don't support this usecase.
Since, this is so controversial, i'll just let them rot on
testing, then
end of discussion.
It's better to unpush them. Updates should not be sitting in testing
forever.
Kevin Kofler
5:25 p.m.
New subject: rpms/python-mpd/F-10 python-mpd.spec,1.2,1.3 sources,1.2,1.3
On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 22:39:56 +0100, Haïkel wrote:
This was a very very low priority task for me, python-mpd is roughly
one
python file mpd.py. There was only one use-case, i could think about :
an unexperienced developer including it in his "multiplatform" project.
Then, he shares it with his friend under windows (nobody is perfect) and
bang it fails!
Expand that scenario a little bit [1]: Imagine that mpd.py suffers from
further bugs specific to that other OS. Would the "unexperienced
developer" or "his friend" request bug-fix updates _from you_?
--
[1] And as another step, one could map it to the source archives we
redistribute in src.rpm packages.
4:59 p.m.
New subject: rpms/python-mpd/F-10 python-mpd.spec,1.2,1.3 sources,1.2,1.3
Haïkel Guémar wrote:
This is personal policy to always push latest stable unless it's
broken,
This makes sense in principle, but not if nothing (of relevance to Fedora)
actually changed.
Why i pushed the update on older branches ? Maintainers are asked to
support branches until EOL and it worked on my test VM.
It's also a good reflex to support all branches with updates, especially
bugfix updates (and I wish more people would do it), but again, only if
there's a reason to push the update in the first place. :-)
Kevin Kofler
5:51 p.m.
New subject: rpms/python-mpd/F-10 python-mpd.spec,1.2,1.3 sources,1.2,1.3
Le 25/10/2009 22:59, Kevin Kofler a écrit :
It's also a good reflex to support all branches with updates, especially
bugfix updates (and I wish more people would do it), but again, only if
there's a reason to push the update in the first place. :-)
Kevin Kofler
they were unpushed, good package monkeys should listen their peers.
H.
5316
days inactive
5316
days old
15 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Christoph Wickert -
Haïkel Guémar -
Kevin Kofler -
Michael Schwendt -
Pierre-Yves Chibon -
Todd Zullinger