Round-up, 2004-09-09

Thu Sep 9 05:41:38 UTC 2004

Jim Popovitch wrote:
> OK, so I've started looking at some of these packages, what is the
> procedure to close them? 

Good we need more ppl that can do that so all want's to help now is the
time to go trough the list and QA packages. The prcedure is to have
2 ppl that have tested a package and voted for publish, then a relase 
manager can put that package in update testing.

List is here:
http://www-astro.physics.ox.ac.uk/~dom/legacy/issues.txt

  For instance, the rsync package (bug 1569)
> looks to be resolved and confirmed.  I see that it has made it's way to
> updates-testing... how does it get from there to updates?

If a package is in testing then a person who has rights to make a relase 
will close the bug after 2 weeks in testing if no one have complained 
about problems during that time.

So the more ppl who can do QA and put feedback into bugzilla the faster 
we can get the packages out.

Jesse when is the 'public' build server ready?

Cheers Johnny

> 
> -Jim P.
> 
> On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 21:17, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> 
>>(Posting this again to let people know of the URL - I'll try and post
>>regularly, but not this regularly, hereafter)
>>
>>$Id: issues.txt,v 1.8 2004/09/08 23:38:03 dom Exp $
>>
>>See bottom for changes
>>
>>This list is also available at
>>http://www-astro.physics.ox.ac.uk/~dom/legacy/issues.txt
>>
>>Packages that have been verified and should be fully released
>>-------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>tcpdump - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1468
>>
>>
>>Packages in state RESOLVED (ie exist in updates-testing) that need
>>active work.
>>------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>mailman - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1269
>>There were some unconfirmed reports of breakage with the candidate. This
>>needs more QA before release.
>>
>>mod_python - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1325
>>Needs 2 VERIFY before release.
>>
>>ethereal - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1419
>>Needs 2 VERIFY before release. - but dup with 1840?
>>
>>kernel - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1484
>>Needs missing file rebuilt for verification - but preferentially put
>>work into later kernel ticket
>>
>>mozilla - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1532
>>Needs 2 VERIFY but has been superceded
>>
>>lha - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1547
>>Needs 2 VERIFY but has been superceded
>>
>>cadaver - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1552
>>Needs 1 VERIFY before release.
>>
>>rsync - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1569
>>Needs 2 VERIFY but has been superceded.
>>
>>flim - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1581
>>Needs 1 VERIFY before release.
>>
>>squid - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1732
>>Needs 1 VERIFY before release (but about to be superceded?)
>>
>>squirrelmail - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1733
>>Needs 2 VERIFY before release (also double check no new issues have
>>cropped up)
>>
>>xchat - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1549
>>Needs 2 VERIFY before release.
>>
>>Packages in state UNCONFIRMED, NEW, ASSIGNED or REOPENED:
>>--------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>* yum - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1583
>>IMO this shouldn't be in the Package Request component
>>close WONTFIX re rh8?
>>
>>vsftp - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1778
>>Resolution of whether we are vulnerable needed.
>>
>>* kernel - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1797
>>VM (non-security) bug in rh9 that was never fixed before EOL. Looks to
>>me like this should be closed WONTFIX.
>>
>>* rpm - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1864
>>No rationale given for bug request - the rh bug it refers to dates from
>>before rh7.3 EOL. WONTFIX?
>>
>>* readline - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=2017
>>Another not fixed before EOL (rh9). WONTFIX?
>>
>>XFree86 - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1289
>>This has had 2 PUBLISHes for 7.3 and the only problem holding it back
>>was likely a gdk-pixbuf red herring. Packages should be built for this
>>and pushed to updates-testing I think.
>>
>>gaim - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1237
>>Needs 2 PUBLISH
>>
>>netpbm - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1257
>>Needs 2 PUBLISH
>>
>>kdelibs - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1373
>>Needs 2 PUBLISH (superceded?)
>>
>>* cal - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1439
>>Should be closed WONTFIX IMO
>>
>>yum - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1604
>>Needs 2 PUBLISH
>>
>>mod_ssl - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1708
>>Needs 2 PUBLISH for rh9 - superceded?
>>
>>mod_ssl - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1888
>>Needs 1 PUBLISH for rh7.3 - superceded?
>>
>>krb5 - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1726
>>Obsoleted
>>
>>mod_proxy - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1737
>>Has 2 PUBLISH, build packages for updates-testing or fix further
>>minor non-security issues
>>
>>libxml - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1324
>>Sort out confusion over status over version in updates-testing and add
>>RESOLVED flag.
>>
>>gdk-pixbuf - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1371
>>Packages built for updates-testing and/or a couple of formal PUBLISH
>>needed.
>>
>>sysstat - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1372
>>Need 2 PUBLISH - 7.3 only I think
>>
>>mc - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1548
>>Need 2 PUBLISH (but superceded?)
>>
>>libpng - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1550
>>Superceded
>>
>>libpng - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1943
>>Need 2 PUBLISH
>>
>>tripwire - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1719
>>Resolve problems with how to version and build fix
>>
>>kernel - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1804
>>Need 2 PUBLISH
>>
>>apache - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1805
>>Is this redundant?
>>
>>XFree86 - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1831
>>Check how this stands with the other open XFree86 bug
>>
>>mysql - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1832
>>Needs 1 PUBLISH but superceded?
>>
>>lha - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1833
>>Needs 2 PUBLISH
>>
>>mozilla - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1834
>>Needs 2 PUBLISH
>>
>>ethereal - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1840
>>Needs PUBLISH for rh9
>>
>>php - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1868
>>Needs PUBLISH, especially for rh7.3
>>
>>abiword - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1906
>>Needs PUBLISH, especially for rh9
>>
>>subversion - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1907
>>Analysis and build fixed packages
>>
>>samba - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1924
>>Needs PUBLISH, especially for rh9
>>
>>gnome vfs - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1944
>>Needs 2 PUBLISH
>>
>>sox - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1945
>>Needs PUBLISH - rh9 status?
>>
>>glibc - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1947
>>Needs PUBLISH
>>
>>qt - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=2002
>>RPM needs work
>>
>>rsync - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=2003
>>Needs PUBLISH
>>
>>gdk-pixbuf - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=2005
>>Analyse and see whether relevant
>>
>>mysql - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=2006
>>needs work
>>
>>ruby - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=2007
>>needs work
>>
>>kdelibs - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=2008
>>Needs analysis
>>
>>mc - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=2009
>>Needs work
>>
>>pam_wheel - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=2010
>>Needs PUBLISH
>>
>>krb5 - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=2040
>>Fix broken 7.3 packages, then QA
>>
>>mod_ssl - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=2041
>>Needs work
>>
>>zlib - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=2043
>>Needs work
>>
>>* kernel - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1614
>>close WONTFIX? Reporter gone AWOL.
>>
>>imlib - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=2051
>>Prepare packages.
>>
>>ImageMagick - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=2052
>>Prepare packages.
>>
>>squid - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=2053
>>Prepare packages.
>>
>>General (non-package bugs)
>>--------------------------
>>
>>* https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1599
>>applies to rh8 only - WONTFIX?
>>
>>* https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1437
>>applies to rh8 only - WONTFIX?
>>
>>* https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1586
>>applies to rh8 only - WONTFIX?
>>
>>https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1963
>>Website needs fixing
>>
>>https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1652
>>Website fix?
>>
>>
>>Notes
>>-----
>>
>>Needs PUBLISH means that there are packages available for QA that need
>>to be QAd at the source level.
>>
>>Needs VERIFY means that there are updates-testing packages that need
>>testing. This is the easy bit, let's get this old ones out of the way
>>ASAP.
>>
>>* means that there is a judgement call that can be made on the bug
>>system immediately. Please follow up onlist with opinions.
>>
>>Changes
>>-------
>>
>>$Log: issues.txt,v $
>>Revision 1.8  2004/09/08 23:38:03  dom
>>move tcpdump to release pile
>>update cadaver, flim, squid
>>add imlib, imagemagick, squid
>>
>>Revision 1.7  2004/09/08 22:58:17  dom
>>new lha packages
>>
>>Revision 1.6  2004/09/08 16:46:13  dom
>>gaim -> need publish, fix broken ethereal URL
>>
>>Revision 1.5  2004/09/08 12:42:32  dom
>>tcpdump needs rh9 verify
>>
>>Revision 1.4  2004/09/08 11:50:55  dom
>>no changes
>>
>>Revision 1.2  2004/09/08 01:23:41  dom
>>add tags
>>
>>
>>--
>>fedora-legacy-list mailing list
>>fedora-legacy-list at redhat.com
>>http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
> 
> 
> 
> --
> fedora-legacy-list mailing list
> fedora-legacy-list at redhat.com
> http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list