On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 10:53:25 -0400, James wrote:
> > Have you been in touch with Will directly on these points?
> No. Is all of this talked about only in private mail or behind other
> curtains? IRC/hallways/meetings only? No public mailing-list?
> I used to be a subscriber of fedora-qa-list but it has been shut
> down very early. Recent documents point to fedora-test-list instead.
Hmm, no ... discussion on autoqa has been very public. Come join an
upcoming QA meeting (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings
you'd like to take
[IRC] meetings without prior communication often are a waste of time.
explicitly points at this list, so
that's what I used for my comments.
There are currently repoclosure and conflicts tests running against
rawhide (and release repo's). Do these capture the obsoletes issue you
What I see on
in the "repoclosure" reports is many false positives.
Stock repoclosure from yum-utils does not implement anything that
evaluates Obsoletes tags.
The "conflicts" reports look much more promising. At least I recognise
several of the conflicts. I think I will compare some of them with the
output of my old i386 script,
or take a look at the source code to find out whether we can focus
on one implementation.
Sometimes packagers create conflicts deliberately (by pushing a partial
set of upgrades) and are annoyed if they receive [semi-]automated bug
reports in bugzilla. Several of the found issues have been reported in
bugzilla a long time ago. Just finding the conflicts is mostly fruitless
as long as packagers need not fix them.
What might you implement in order to capture the obsoletes