On Wed, 11 Feb 2015 15:53:50 +0100
Tim Flink <tflink(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jan 2015 12:27:09 +0100
Dan Horák <dan(a)danny.cz> wrote:
> Hi Tim,
> I'm replying to your questions from December.
> yes, the secondary arches follow the same process as primary, they
> have blocker bugs, etc. Also accepted blockers in secondary should be
> promoted to Exceptions in primary, it would be nice to have such
> "button" in the app for secondaries, but we can workaround it. It Also
> means that the AcceptedBlocker/... states should be prefixed (or
> suffixed) with the $arch to distinguish between primary/secondary
Yeah, I think it's worth talking about what all we'd want to have in a
PA/SA unified blocker tracking app (SA blockers showing up as PA FEs,
etc.) but that's still going to take some non-trivial re-writing. I'm
not against doing it, but it's going to take time.
not a problem, the unified blocker app is a RFE and might be even
considered as part of the koji 2.0 development
> For a start we could have own instances for arm/aarch64, ppc and
> but having a multi-arch blocker app in the future would be nice I
> think. And if I see correctly, you will be on the DevConf so we can
> talk about the requirements and options in person there.
I think we forgot to get this figured out while at DevConf. I still
yeah, the breaks between the talks were too short for finding the needed
people in the hallways :-)
don't see having multiple arch trackers in the same app
before F22 but I'm still game for having instances for aarch64, ppc and
s390 if that'd be helpful to the secarch folks.
We might want to add some visual distinction between the PA and SA
instances so there aren't any complaints about "secondary doesn't
block primary!" but that's pretty easy to do and roll up in a new
have separate apps set for f22 will work well for us, what should be
the next step? shall I open a ticket somewhere?
> On Fri, 28 Nov 2014 10:44:24 +0100
> Normand <normand at linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > Hi there,
> > I used the blockerbugs application at
> > https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/propose_bug
but found that
> > this is restricted to the primary arch releases.
> Yeah, it wasn't really designed to handle releases on multiple arches.
> > Could it be possible to have it improved to support secondary arch
> > releases (ppc64, s390, ...) ?
> I don't think that it could happen in time for F21 but I'm definitely
> game for figuring out what changes need to happen in order for
> secondary arches to use the blocker tracking app (either a new
> instance or supporting multiple arches in the app).
> Do the secondary arch releases use the same process as primary arch
> for blockers - tracker bzs for blocker/fe, AcceptedBlocker notation
> qa-devel mailing list