Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Marijn Schouten (hkBst)" <hkBst@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: 0-day bump requests
Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 08:37:35
Message-Id: 486DE169.6090103@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] RFC: 0-day bump requests by Jeroen Roovers
1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
2 Hash: SHA1
3
4 Jeroen Roovers wrote:
5 > Hi fellow developers,
6 >
7 >
8 > it seems I've run into a minor issue with fellow bug wrangler carlo
9 > (who has been putting a lot of work into that, for which we should all
10 > be grateful).
11 >
12 > Carsten has a cut-and-paste message that he posts in comments to
13 > version bump bug reports that he finds have been filed on the day the
14 > software version in question was released/announced. The gist of the
15 > message is that none of or most ebuild developers do not like these
16 > "0-day requests" and that users (and developers) should refrain from
17 > filing them on the same day. Waiting a week would be OK, the message
18 > seems to say.
19 >
20 > Being an ebuild developer myself, I have to say that I do not hold that
21 > stance and that I welcome early version bump requests. Therefore, I
22 > refrain from adding such messages to the bugs that I wrangle and indeed
23 > welcome any bump requests[1].
24 >
25 > Finding myself in conflict with someone I have come to share a certain
26 > workload with, notably someone who has a few more years of Gentoo
27 > experience, I wonder what the majority of our ebuild developers
28 > actually think. In that spirit, I hope the following questions are
29 > neutral enough for everyone to *not* start a flamewar over this. :)
30 >
31 >
32 > -----
33 > 1) How do you feel when you receive an early version bump request?
34
35 Since current mores make sure there are not so many, I don't mind them.
36
37 > 2) If you had your way, would you discourage users from filing early
38 > version bump requests?
39
40 To prevent every package from getting a 0-day bump request, I'd say give it a
41 day or two at least, unless you have some info other than that there is a new
42 version. For example that the current ebuild still works with the new version or
43 that it doesn't. It helps with gauging which bumps are trivial and which aren't.
44
45 If someone only wants to tell me some new version is out, I prefer they ping me
46 on irc.
47
48 > -----
49 >
50 > I know, it's not a particularly good survey, but I hope the plenty and
51 > diversity of your answers will shed more light on the matter. :)
52 >
53 >
54 > Thank you and kind regards,
55 > JeR
56 >
57 >
58 > [1] In fact I regularly use the opportunity to check on the HOMEPAGE
59 > whether the release was security related, and I assign directly to
60 > security@ when that is the case (CC'ing the package's maintainers) and
61 > perhaps pasting ChangeLog or advisory info in a comment.
62
63 Marijn
64
65 - --
66 Marijn Schouten (hkBst), Gentoo Lisp project, Gentoo ML
67 <http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-{lisp,ml} on FreeNode
68 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
69 Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)
70 Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
71
72 iEYEARECAAYFAkht4WkACgkQp/VmCx0OL2xJ6QCfbX/IvrzARx3AY2FzAHW4sD2P
73 TasAn2NTD0c+HE0ehaG3wd9bFdk+yzSh
74 =pj1H
75 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
76 --
77 gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list