bittorrent downgrade (was: Re: [Fedora Project Wiki] Update of "Extras/RepoRequests" by PaulHowarth)
5:55 a.m.
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 08:38:38 -0000, fedorawiki wrote:
Request removal of broken rawhide bittorrent package so that it can
be downgraded without an epoch bump
+
+ * devel bittorrent-5.0.5-2.fc7.src.rpm
Do we have any policy/guideline with regard to things like this?
The least thing I'd like to suggest is a warning-mail posted to relevant
mailing lists.
7:14 a.m.
On Wednesday 28 February 2007 06:55, Michael Schwendt wrote:
Do we have any policy/guideline with regard to things like this?
The least thing I'd like to suggest is a warning-mail posted to relevant
mailing lists.
We've kicked around some ideas. I like the idea of no broken upgrade paths
after the final test release, but up to the final test release one can drop
version without invoking epoch.
Thoughts?
--
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
7:42 a.m.
New subject: bittorrent downgrade
Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 08:38:38 -0000, fedorawiki wrote:
> Request removal of broken rawhide bittorrent package so that it can be downgraded
without an epoch bump
>
> +
> + * devel bittorrent-5.0.5-2.fc7.src.rpm
Do we have any policy/guideline with regard to things like this?
The least thing I'd like to suggest is a warning-mail posted to relevant
mailing lists.
I did ask about whether this was OK earlier in the month
(http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-February/msg00514.html)
and although there wasn't any direct reply, Jesse did suggest in the
thread that downgrades without epoch bumps would be OK by him up to test
3, and I don't recall any dissenting voices.
Is an announcement (once the downgrade is done) to fedora-devel-list
sufficient, or are there any other appropriate mailing lists deemed
relevant?
The downgraded package was built and released yesterday, but effectively
never made it into the repo because the existing broken package has a
higher EVR. Once the existing package is nuked, will I need to resubmit
a build request for the downgrade package, and will I need to bump the
release to avoid an "invalid build" since it's already been built and
"released" before?
Paul.
8:33 a.m.
ons, 28 02 2007 kl. 12:55 +0100, skrev Michael Schwendt:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 08:38:38 -0000, fedorawiki wrote:
> Request removal of broken rawhide bittorrent package so that it can be downgraded
without an epoch bump
>
> +
> + * devel bittorrent-5.0.5-2.fc7.src.rpm
Do we have any policy/guideline with regard to things like this?
The least thing I'd like to suggest is a warning-mail posted to relevant
mailing lists.
I might have missed this but why are we downgrading bittorrent (outside
of the gui throwing a segfault on startup).
- David Nielsen
--
"Ridicule is the only weapon that can be used against unintelligible
propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them.”
-Thomas Jefferson
8:46 a.m.
n 28/02/07, David Nielsen <david(a)lovesunix.net> wrote:
ons, 28 02 2007 kl. 12:55 +0100, skrev Michael Schwendt:
> On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 08:38:38 -0000, fedorawiki wrote:
>
> > Request removal of broken rawhide bittorrent package so that it can be
downgraded without an epoch bump
> >
> > +
> > + * devel bittorrent-5.0.5-2.fc7.src.rpm
>
> Do we have any policy/guideline with regard to things like this?
>
> The least thing I'd like to suggest is a warning-mail posted to relevant
> mailing lists.
I might have missed this but why are we downgrading bittorrent (outside
of the gui throwing a segfault on startup).
Not sure, but I notice there's a newer version (5.0.6) of bittorrent
available, that may or may not address the reason why 5.0.5 is being
dropped:
http://download.bittorrent.com/dl/BitTorrent-5.0.6.tar.gz
Jonathan.
9 a.m.
New subject: bittorrent downgrade
Jonathan Underwood wrote:
n 28/02/07, David Nielsen <david(a)lovesunix.net> wrote:
> ons, 28 02 2007 kl. 12:55 +0100, skrev Michael Schwendt:
> > On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 08:38:38 -0000, fedorawiki wrote:
> >
> > > Request removal of broken rawhide bittorrent package so that it
> can be downgraded without an epoch bump
> > >
> > > +
> > > + * devel bittorrent-5.0.5-2.fc7.src.rpm
> >
> > Do we have any policy/guideline with regard to things like this?
> >
> > The least thing I'd like to suggest is a warning-mail posted to
> relevant
> > mailing lists.
>
> I might have missed this but why are we downgrading bittorrent (outside
> of the gui throwing a segfault on startup).
>
Not sure, but I notice there's a newer version (5.0.6) of bittorrent
available, that may or may not address the reason why 5.0.5 is being
dropped:
http://download.bittorrent.com/dl/BitTorrent-5.0.6.tar.gz
Whilst there are some changes in the logging code that causes the
segfault in 5.0.5, 5.0.6 still segfaults with wxPython 2.8.
Paul.
8:46 a.m.
New subject: bittorrent downgrade
David Nielsen wrote:
ons, 28 02 2007 kl. 12:55 +0100, skrev Michael Schwendt:
> On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 08:38:38 -0000, fedorawiki wrote:
>
>> Request removal of broken rawhide bittorrent package so that it can be downgraded
without an epoch bump
>>
>> +
>> + * devel bittorrent-5.0.5-2.fc7.src.rpm
> Do we have any policy/guideline with regard to things like this?
>
> The least thing I'd like to suggest is a warning-mail posted to relevant
> mailing lists.
I might have missed this but why are we downgrading bittorrent (outside
of the gui throwing a segfault on startup).
That's not a good enough reason is it?
Paul.
9:05 a.m.
New subject: bittorrent downgrade
ons, 28 02 2007 kl. 14:46 +0000, skrev Paul Howarth:
David Nielsen wrote:
> ons, 28 02 2007 kl. 12:55 +0100, skrev Michael Schwendt:
>> On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 08:38:38 -0000, fedorawiki wrote:
>>
>>> Request removal of broken rawhide bittorrent package so that it can be
downgraded without an epoch bump
>>>
>>> +
>>> + * devel bittorrent-5.0.5-2.fc7.src.rpm
>> Do we have any policy/guideline with regard to things like this?
>>
>> The least thing I'd like to suggest is a warning-mail posted to relevant
>> mailing lists.
>
> I might have missed this but why are we downgrading bittorrent (outside
> of the gui throwing a segfault on startup).
That's not a good enough reason is it?
I would consider it a good reason to file bugs.. I was wondering if the
license changed or something which would be the only reason I could come
up with.
- David
--
"Ridicule is the only weapon that can be used against unintelligible
propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them.”
-Thomas Jefferson
9:13 a.m.
New subject: bittorrent downgrade
David Nielsen wrote:
ons, 28 02 2007 kl. 14:46 +0000, skrev Paul Howarth:
> David Nielsen wrote:
>> ons, 28 02 2007 kl. 12:55 +0100, skrev Michael Schwendt:
>>> On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 08:38:38 -0000, fedorawiki wrote:
>>>
>>>> Request removal of broken rawhide bittorrent package so that it can be
downgraded without an epoch bump
>>>>
>>>> +
>>>> + * devel bittorrent-5.0.5-2.fc7.src.rpm
>>> Do we have any policy/guideline with regard to things like this?
>>>
>>> The least thing I'd like to suggest is a warning-mail posted to relevant
>>> mailing lists.
>> I might have missed this but why are we downgrading bittorrent (outside
>> of the gui throwing a segfault on startup).
> That's not a good enough reason is it?
I would consider it a good reason to file bugs.. I was wondering if the
license changed or something which would be the only reason I could come
up with.
Bugs have been filed, but upstream is not working with wxPython 2.8 so
there's little prospect of it working before FC7 is released. Hence the
downgrade back to 4.4.0, which does work.
Paul.
6260
days inactive
6260
days old
8 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
David Nielsen -
Jesse Keating -
Jonathan Underwood -
Michael Schwendt -
Paul Howarth