Active Topics

 


Page 2 of 8 1 2 34 Last »
Reply
Thread Tools
X-Fade is offline X-Fade
2012-04-04 , 14:48
Posts: 152 | Thanked: 620 times | Joined on Mar 2008 @ Netherlands
#11
Originally Posted by timoph View Post
So if I understood correctly packages with at least 2 up votes from supertesters should get automatically promoted? Or do they just get unlocked for developer to promote? If promoted - there seems to be a bug ( http://maemo.org/packages/package_in...1.2-15-maemo2/ ). If it's not - how difficult it would be to make it do so? IMO that should help a lot with packages getting stuck in the QA queue.
Promotion is unlocked then, the maintainer still needs to push it. The maintainer will receive an email that he can promote the package. Automatic promotion is something which would need to be added to the unlock part.

If there is consensus about doing automatic promotion on unlock, then I can add that to the code.
__________________
http://maemo.org/profile/view/xfade/ - maemo.org webmaster Apps.formeego.org (Apps for N9)
 

The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to X-Fade For This Useful Post:
ivgalvez is offline ivgalvez
2012-04-04 , 14:48
Posts: 1,397 | Thanked: 2,126 times | Joined on Nov 2009 @ Dublin, Ireland
#12
There is also a problem to promote packages depending on libsdl-ttf2.0-0.

Do someone knows what is the status of that problem? Can that prohibition be revoked?
 

The Following User Says Thank You to ivgalvez For This Useful Post:
timoph is offline timoph
2012-04-04 , 14:51
Posts: 415 | Thanked: 732 times | Joined on Jan 2009 @ Finland
#13
Originally Posted by X-Fade View Post
If there is consensus about doing automatic promotion on unlock, then I can add that to the code.
While I'm for that - I'd like to see a bit wider discussion on the topic if it's ok for others so we don't act against the community's will. Maybe the council can make the call?
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to timoph For This Useful Post:
X-Fade is offline X-Fade
2012-04-04 , 14:59
Posts: 152 | Thanked: 620 times | Joined on Mar 2008 @ Netherlands
#14
Originally Posted by ivgalvez View Post
There is also a problem to promote packages depending on libsdl-ttf2.0-0.

Do someone knows what is the status of that problem? Can that prohibition be revoked?
Afaik that was added because it broke something in some PR release. But I really can't find what it was about anymore. If it works with PR1.3 or CSSU, I guess it can be removed.
__________________
http://maemo.org/profile/view/xfade/ - maemo.org webmaster Apps.formeego.org (Apps for N9)
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to X-Fade For This Useful Post:
ivgalvez is offline ivgalvez
2012-04-04 , 14:59
Posts: 1,397 | Thanked: 2,126 times | Joined on Nov 2009 @ Dublin, Ireland
#15
Nowadays that manual step is preventing a lot of applications to be promoted. Right now 49 applications are eligible for promotion (maybe not all depending on that step, but most).

As there aren't many testers, the process is taking time and there is a good chance that the original developer have moved to a different platform or is no longer interested in doing anything more with his application.

Consider that if the original maintainer had already promoted the application to Testing, it's because he considered it suitable for promotion, so there is no point in requiring another manual step.
 

The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to ivgalvez For This Useful Post:
ivgalvez is offline ivgalvez
2012-04-04 , 15:00
Posts: 1,397 | Thanked: 2,126 times | Joined on Nov 2009 @ Dublin, Ireland
#16
Originally Posted by X-Fade View Post
Afaik that was added because it broke something in some PR release. But I really can't find what it was about anymore. If it works with PR1.3 or CSSU, I guess it can be removed.
It's working with both, but I would wait to someone expert in SDL (Javispedro?) to clarify.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to ivgalvez For This Useful Post:
freemangordon is offline freemangordon
2012-04-04 , 15:49
Posts: 3,074 | Thanked: 12,960 times | Joined on Mar 2010 @ Sofia,Bulgaria
#17
@X-Fade, are you aware that the bug with kernel-power packages not appearing in fremantle extras-devel web interface is still not solved https://bugs.maemo.org/12284? I am posting here as noone has commented on the bugtracker since the bug has been reopened and both me and Pali were not able to reach you through IRC.

Do you have any idea what's wrong, is it that kernel-power build scripts somehow provoke autobuilder/whatever to go nuts or there is another problem? Any help on that will be appreciated.
 

The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to freemangordon For This Useful Post:
javispedro's Avatar
javispedro is offline javispedro
2012-04-04 , 15:53
Posts: 2,355 | Thanked: 5,249 times | Joined on Jan 2009 @ Barcelona
#18
Originally Posted by X-Fade View Post
Afaik that was added because it broke something in some PR release. But I really can't find what it was about anymore. If it works with PR1.3 or CSSU, I guess it can be removed.
I remember this well. It was bug 10450.
I will _never_ understand why it was refused to fix the wrongly-named binary SDK package.
This can be fixed for SSU, but I do not think anyone has done it yet.

I do not know what has happened since that bug. If the crappy-dev-package is still on the SDK repo, it should get pulled before the Debian repackaged one (because "osso" > "maemo"), and therefore the built package should dep on libsdl-ttf2.0 (no -0), avoiding the blockage. So no idea why it deps on -0 atm.
Last edited by javispedro; 2012-04-04 at 15:57. Reason: typo
 

The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to javispedro For This Useful Post:
javispedro's Avatar
javispedro is offline javispedro
2012-04-04 , 15:57
Posts: 2,355 | Thanked: 5,249 times | Joined on Jan 2009 @ Barcelona
#19
Originally Posted by ivgalvez View Post
Consider that if the original maintainer had already promoted the application to Testing, it's because he considered it suitable for promotion, so there is no point in requiring another manual step.
Well, I do have an application that I uploaded to testing, then got a complain about a serious issue although in a very corner-case configuration.
So I decided that I would not promote it, wanting to build a new version, but time passes...

In any case, the point is that I wouldn't do it automatically. There's an automated email reminder, and I think that's enough already.
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to javispedro For This Useful Post:
freemangordon is offline freemangordon
2012-04-04 , 15:59
Posts: 3,074 | Thanked: 12,960 times | Joined on Mar 2010 @ Sofia,Bulgaria
#20
Originally Posted by javispedro View Post
I remember this well. It was bug 10450.
I will _never_ understand why it was refused to fix the wrongly-named binary SDK package.
This can be fixed for SSU, but I do not think anyone has done it yet.

I do not know what has happened since that bug. If the crappy-dev-package is still on the SDK repo, it should get pulled before the Debian repackaged one (because "osso" > "maemo"), and therefore the built package should dep on libsdl-ttf2.0 (no -0), avoiding the blockage. So no idea why it deps on -0 atm.
If you think that could be fixed in CSSU, just open a bug against it along with the original bug report.
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to freemangordon For This Useful Post:
Reply
Page 2 of 8 1 2 34 Last »

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:27.

Contact Us - Home - Archive - Top