rawhide report: 20050516 changes

[Michael Schwendt]

On Tue, 17 May 2005 10:45:57 +0200 (CEST), nodata wrote:

> > On Mon, 16 May 2005 17:27:49 -0700, John Reiser wrote:
> >
> >> IgnitionWorks wrote:
> >> > The developers are working on high priority issues and
> >> > I personally do not think this is a high priority or a
> >> > show stopper.
> >> >
> >> > The build system script needs to check for updated
> >> > packages, if any, else send 'No packages' email.
> >> >
> >> > For the interm, they can run cron M-F only.
> >> >
> >> > Either way, it's a trivial issue.
> >>
> >> No, the _issue_ is NOT trivial.  The current behavior directly
> >> undermines the little trust that volunteer testers have
> >> left in the Fedora development system.  It's broken,
> >> in a MAJOR way.
> >>
> >> The _fix_ IS trivial.  At the end of the report, add a line:
> >>
> >>       <n> packages updated.
> >>
> >> If the list is empty and 0==n, then everyone will know
> >> that the probability is at least 0.99999 that no packages
> >> were updated, and that therefore an empty list is to be expected.
> >> Otherwise, an empty list and no line "0 packages updated."
> >> will indicate an error somewhere in the process.
> >> Imagine that: truly effective communication.
> >
> > Empty list means no new packages found by the script.
> >
> 
> Or that something went wrong, which is why this discussion is taking place.

The script can't know that as it just looks for new packages which left
the build system.  If you want more details about updates, subscribe to
the cvs commits list where you could monitor actual package updates in
cvs.

Also, even when there was no problem in the build system, it has happened
multiple times before that somebody was surprised to get no updates on a
Sunday.

Why not just wait a day or two, practise in patience and wait whether on
the following days there will be updates again?

-- 
Fedora Core release 3 (Heidelberg) - Linux 2.6.11-1.14_FC3
loadavg: 1.06 1.16 1.08