repoinfo.conf and older releases
James Laska
jlaska at redhat.com
Mon Sep 27 20:29:28 UTC 2010
On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 17:33 -0400, Kamil Paral wrote:
> ----- "James Laska" <jlaska at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > > What is the reason to keep repos of unmaintained released in
> > repoinfo.conf?
> > > I can't find any usage of it. Currently I would just remove all
> > unmaintained
> > > releases and remove 'isactiverelease' keyword as well.
> >
> > Hmm, yeah. I don't know why I like keeping the old entries around.
> > But
> > it does seem silly to continue with old entries that don't work.
> > Let's
> > just drop f10 and f11 from repoinfo.conf.
>
> If we don't have other uses for it, I would drop it. We have the history
> in git, it can be easily added back again when needed in the future.
>
> >
> > > By the way, 'isactiverelease' variable confuses me anyway. Why is
> > Branched
> > > active, but Rawhide inactive? I don't understand that.
> >
> > While it's not 100% clear from the mail thread or the commit log on
> > this
> > subject, I understand that the 'isactiverelease' was added to
> > indicate
> > what entries has install images available. Wwoods can confirm.
> > Iirc,
> > post-tree-compose was failing because install images are no longer
> > built
> > and provided for rawhide (and for EOL'd releases [1]). According to
> > the
> > comment in repoinfo.py,
> >
> > getreleases() - '''Return the list of known, non-EOL
> > releases.'''
> >
> > Using that definition, Rawhide isn't a Fedora release as installation
> > images are not provided. Rawhide is just a repository of packages.
> > I
> > wonder if it makes sense to rename 'isactiverelease' to
> > 'isinstallable'?
>
> Ah, in that case it makes sense. The variable name could really be
> improved to be clearer.
>
> If the variable exists just for this one use case, we can also avoid
> it and just disable test scheduling for post-tree-compose tests
> for rawhide (hardcoded in control.autoqa). Whatever you like.
I have a suspicion that it will be easier for us to manage policy
changes if we continue to control this by way of a config file variable.
I'll send a patch to the list later on to rename the config variable.
Thanks,
James
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : https://fedorahosted.org/pipermail/autoqa-devel/attachments/20100927/b8491bd1/attachment.bin
More information about the autoqa-devel
mailing list