On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 10:33:01PM +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Tuesday, 23 January 2018 at 20:16, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 12:25:56PM -0600, Rex Dieter wrote:
> > > There are three tests that must pass in order for updates to go to
stable:
> > > 0. dist.depcheck - to make sure the update's dependencies are
available.
> > > 1. dist.abicheck - to make sure the update's ABI remains stable in a
> > > given Fedora release.
> > ...
> > > Finally, if it turns out you need to push an update through despite of
the
> > > test results, you can do so using waiver-cli (dnf install waiverdb-cli).
> > > We are working on integrating this into Bodhi itself, making this easier.
> > I think it unwise to make item 1 a mandatory item at this point. I'd
argue
> > a large number of packages do not provide public api/abi that's worth
> > worrying about in this regard.
>
> I think we should definine a set of packages where we care about this,
> and enable it on a case-by-case basis and make it advisory otherwise.
That makes sense. How about we start with critical path packages?
Alternatively, libraries which a lot of of other packages depend on
would be good candidates.
A thought - we need a defined process for changing and proposing
changes to the greenwave policy. Right now, it reflects a proof of
concept list that "we just made up" to get this up and running.
At the moment, anyone in the 'sysadmin-qa' group is able to make
changes to it. Should FESCo be involved? QA? FPC?
I want to fix tooling issues, but don't want to be the policy arbiter.
Let's get ourselves unblocked for now and then start figuring out some
process around this stuff.