|
Home > Archive > Debian Developers > January 2006 > A great weekend for Debian
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
A great weekend for Debian
|
|
| Joseph Smidt 2006-01-22, 8:58 pm |
| On Friday morning I looked at the RC report and there was about 1300 bugs
total with 550 that will affect the next release. Now there is 1090 total
and falling, possibly will go down to about 1000 as the weekend finally
ends. Similarly there is currently 387 that will affect the next release
with the possibility of going down to 350 by the end o the weekend. That
would be as many as 300 bugs fixed in one weekend with 200 concerning the
next release. I say what a great weekend! 
Joseph Smidt
| |
| Steinar H. Gunderson 2006-01-22, 8:58 pm |
| On Sun, Jan 22, 2006 at 05:33:42PM -0700, Joseph Smidt wrote:
> On Friday morning I looked at the RC report and there was about 1300 bugs
> total with 550 that will affect the next release. Now there is 1090 total
> and falling, possibly will go down to about 1000 as the weekend finally
> ends. Similarly there is currently 387 that will affect the next release
> with the possibility of going down to 350 by the end o the weekend. That
> would be as many as 300 bugs fixed in one weekend with 200 concerning the
> next release. I say what a great weekend!
I think you're overly optimistic :-) Most of the simple RC bugs (related to
the xlibs-dev transition) have been fixed; there aren't 90 more like those.
Those left are:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgr...repeatmerged=no
I guess there will soon be less than 50 left (some uploads haven't gone
through yet); ten of those are tagged pending (I won't NMU them under the
nose of an active maintainer, and I doubt many others will). The remaining
ones are either blocked by other packages, depend on other FTBFS bugs, on
removed packages or otherwise not possible to upload in five minutes like the
others were.
OTOH, the upload rate has really been impressive at times -- I guess the poor
buildds will have enough to do for a little while. :-)
/* Steinar */
--
Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
|
| Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
> I think you're overly optimistic :-) Most of the simple RC bugs
> (related to the xlibs-dev transition) have been fixed; there aren't 90
> more like those. Those left are:
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgr...repeatmerged=no
You are right, the most simple ones are fixed now, only the ugly ones
remain.
We could use some help, so fellow Developers, smash an ugly bug today!
--
.''`. sleep: command not found
: :' :
`. `' Proudly running unstable Debian GNU/Linux
`- www.amayita.com www.malapecora.com www.chicasduras.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
|
| Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
> I think you're overly optimistic :-) Most of the simple RC bugs
> (related to the xlibs-dev transition) have been fixed; there aren't 90
> more like those.
I got home from work and have second thoughts about the email I
previously sent. I think I am a bit pissed off by this "simple RC bugs"
statement. I don't personally care about my own credit, but I think the
people who worked in this transition deserved the email Joseph Smidt
sent and an acknowledgement for their work. Some of us have been barely
doing anything else in our lives than this transition for 14 days.
I am talking about Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt, Thomas Viehmann, Nico Golde,
Steve Langasek, Victor Seva Lopez and Justin Pryzby, others I might not
be aware of, and Moritz Muehlenhoff, who provided the script that helps
find out the new Build-Depends.
Let me explain. In 14 days, we have gone from a total of 577 reported
bugs to
- Serious policy violations; Patch Available (5 bugs)
- Serious policy violations; Unclassified (34 bugs)
- Pending Upload bugs - Serious policy violations (9 bugs)
That is *impressive*. That amounts to 48 bugs to go. Some of them are
still "easy", and we are still working on them.
There is a *huge* amount of work behind those figures, whether the task
looks tedious, repetitive and low profile to you or not, someone had to
do it, and it has been done.
In the meantime we have also reported MIA maintainers and have given the
packages some love, ie fixing other RC bugs in our NMUs. Sometimes we
have felt inspired and provided "quality" uploads as opposed to fixing
"simple" RC bugs (related to the xlibs-dev transition).
See, for example your patch to libggiwmh, which only takes care of the
xlibs-transition:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugr...452;msg=5;att=1
as opposed to what would have been my pacth:
http://www.amayita.com/debian/xlibs...ebian/changelog
But when I wanted to attach my patch to 349452 I was late, you had already
uploaded
There is nothing wrong with your patch BTW. That's not what I mean.
The RC bug chart looks lovely:
http://bugs.debian.org/release-critical/
Most of the time, I just NMUed otehr people's changes, but also went
through testing, re-testing, and testing again, also trying to fix
other bugs in the packages, and giving them some love, as I explained
at: http://lists.debian.org/debian-ment...1/msg00168.html
I know it is not the NMU goal to go this far, but I had fun, and got to
work with wonderful people in the proccess. I am also aware I sometimes
XXXXed up (I broke links2, and have been reported to attach patches for
the wrong packages or to the wrong bug numbers) out of exhaustion
There is still major breakage to deal with. A list of up-for-adoption
packages to be reported, maintainers to be pinged, more bugs to me filed
(as in your package is in bad shape, either fix it or orphan it).
It has been also depressing to upload certaing packages in bad shape,
and in cases I have refused to upload at all because of packages being
in terrible shape. Some of the packages that still need to be fixed are
marked for removal.
If you look at http://haydn.debian.org/~thuriaux-guest/qa/ you will
discover that the QA team (which I am sadly not as active in as I would
want to be) is in fact doing quite well and the sad lesson for me to
learn is the incredible amount of people silently dissapearing and
neglecting their packages while we assume those packages have a
maintainer.
It leads me to think Debian accounts should expire in a year of no
activity and packages be automatically orphaned, but it is just a side
effect of RC over-dose, and I really need to go back to my own packages
when this is over.
To all of those who have walked this path kudos!
--
.''`. sleep: command not found
: :' :
`. `' Proudly running unstable Debian GNU/Linux
`- www.amayita.com www.malapecora.com www.chicasduras.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Gustavo Franco 2006-01-23, 6:14 pm |
| On 1/23/06, Amaya <amaya@debian.org> wrote:
> Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
>
> I got home from work and have second thoughts about the email I
> previously sent. I think I am a bit pissed off by this "simple RC bugs"
> statement. I don't personally care about my own credit, but I think the
> people who worked in this transition deserved the email Joseph Smidt
> sent and an acknowledgement for their work. Some of us have been barely
> doing anything else in our lives than this transition for 14 days.
>
> I am talking about Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt, Thomas Viehmann, Nico Golde,
> Steve Langasek, Victor Seva Lopez and Justin Pryzby, others I might not
> be aware of, and Moritz Muehlenhoff, who provided the script that helps
> find out the new Build-Depends.
>
> (...)
The point is that there are a lot of people in this project that loves
(or not) duelling banjos, cares (or not) about lesbians, uses Debian
and Ubuntu (or not) and keep considering that flamewars are a waste of
time and we still are about a *universal* operating system, that
involves "shut up and hack" sometimes and "be cool" in others.
Thanks Justin, Amaya and all the others involved in any transition or
just for you that keep your packages without RC bugs as much as you
can, or for you that look into the RC bug list and feel that you
should help.
Sometimes, it's really good feel that i'm less than 1/1000 of all this
and while i'm busy helping with something that i think is important
there are others working in others not less interesting tasks.
Etch is coming.
Thanks,
Gustavo Franco
| |
| Kevin Mark 2006-01-24, 2:50 am |
| On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 06:56:56PM +0100, Amaya wrote:
#include <hi.h>
and thanks for your time to write such a useful note about how you and
others are keeping Debian great!
<much snip-age>
>
> It leads me to think Debian accounts should expire in a year of no
> activity and packages be automatically orphaned, but it is just a side
> effect of RC over-dose, and I really need to go back to my own packages
> when this is over.
<story>
I was thinking of an analogy of a car rental store. A company (Debian)
owns a car (a package) and 'hires' a mechanic (maintainer) to look after
it. Folks come in from time to time and rent the car (use the package).
From time to time folks who rent the car notice problems with the car
and tell the mechanic about them. So, when the car is brought back,
night after night, he/she fixes the car. And then folks come in again
and rent the car and notice the improvements. But after sometime, the
car starts to fall apart and then the mechanic is no where to be found. It
seem like the company owners should ask where the mechanic went and the
mechanic should either leave a note (out to lunch, on vacation, on
personal leave) or before leaving, should tell the company to find a
fill-in mechanic, add a mechanic to the mechanic team or if no notice is
given, start looking for a new mechanic who reports back when he/she
will be out.
</story>
<comment>
It seems various people have sought to address some of the issue of
lack of package maintanership: low threshold NMU policy. This is to
combat the 'fiefdom' idea which is a non-technical issue. And the idea
of a one year term on @debian.org accounts and official maintainer
status for their packages is a techincal solution to the problem of
'fiefdom's.
</comment>
<idea>
Folks are away for legitimate reasons: paid-work, family obligations,
sickness, lack of /bin/sleep ;-). If folks said: "I want to continue to
work on package X but will be away for <time period>" where <time
period> was not large enought to warrant concern for the package upkeep,
then fine. Otherwise the person should seek to have someone fill-in for
their time or they could choose to hand it over to someone else. That
could be done with a list for all packages where DD,NM and others could
signup for wanting to work on the package. Otherwise the list could be
used as a way for others to seek a person to address an issue raised by
new upstream, an RC bug or security issue.
</idea>
Unfortunatley it does't address all issues for package upkeep when the
maintainer is MIA and no one is to be found to continue the work.
Again,
thanks to all who do great work and contribute much to world
domination^H^H^H^H^Debian!
Kev
--
counter.li.org #238656 -- goto counter.li.org and be counted!
`$' $'
$ $ _
,d$$$g$ ,d$$$b. $,d$$$b`$' g$$$$$b $,d$$b
,$P' `$ ,$P' `Y$ $$' `$ $ "' `$ $$' `$
$$ $ $$ggggg$ $ $ $ ,$P"" $ $ $
`$g. ,$$ `$$._ _. $ _,g$P $ `$b. ,$$ $ $
`Y$$P'$. `Y$$$$P $$$P"' ,$. `Y$$P'$ $. ,$.
| |
| Kevin Mark 2006-01-24, 2:50 am |
| On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 11:08:57AM +0100, Amaya wrote:
> Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
>
> You are right, the most simple ones are fixed now, only the ugly ones
> remain.
>
> We could use some help, so fellow Developers, smash an ugly bug today!
Hi Amaya,
to paraphrase your recent blog quote:
make (NMU) love, not (flame) war!
cheers,
Kev
--
counter.li.org #238656 -- goto counter.li.org and be counted!
`$' $'
$ $ _
,d$$$g$ ,d$$$b. $,d$$$b`$' g$$$$$b $,d$$b
,$P' `$ ,$P' `Y$ $$' `$ $ "' `$ $$' `$
$$ $ $$ggggg$ $ $ $ ,$P"" $ $ $
`$g. ,$$ `$$._ _. $ _,g$P $ `$b. ,$$ $ $
`Y$$P'$. `Y$$$$P $$$P"' ,$. `Y$$P'$ $. ,$.
|
|
|
|
|