Does the backporters team need help?

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
12 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Does the backporters team need help?

Clint Byrum-4
Hi. I was just looking and I noticed backport bugs piling up:

https://bugs.launchpad.net/xenial-backports

Once, long ago, I was going to join the effort, but my time for Ubuntu
has been pretty limited. That said, if y'all need help, I can probably
throw an hour at these kinds of things every month or so.

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Does the backporters team need help?

Clint Byrum-4
Judging by the deafening silence, either they don't read ubuntu-devel,
or the answer is yes.

How can we resolve this?

Excerpts from Clint Byrum's message of 2017-04-14 11:30:12 -0700:
> Hi. I was just looking and I noticed backport bugs piling up:
>
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/xenial-backports
>
> Once, long ago, I was going to join the effort, but my time for Ubuntu
> has been pretty limited. That said, if y'all need help, I can probably
> throw an hour at these kinds of things every month or so.

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Does the backporters team need help?

Scott Kitterman-3
The answer is clearly yes.  I've attempted a few times to pass off backports
to someone new and apparently failed.  I'll be glad spend a few minutes
getting you up to speed, but as I'm not involved in Ubuntu development
anymore, I don't really have time for more than that.

Scott K

On Monday, April 24, 2017 03:31:20 PM Clint Byrum wrote:

> Judging by the deafening silence, either they don't read ubuntu-devel,
> or the answer is yes.
>
> How can we resolve this?
>
> Excerpts from Clint Byrum's message of 2017-04-14 11:30:12 -0700:
> > Hi. I was just looking and I noticed backport bugs piling up:
> >
> > https://bugs.launchpad.net/xenial-backports
> >
> > Once, long ago, I was going to join the effort, but my time for Ubuntu
> > has been pretty limited. That said, if y'all need help, I can probably
> > throw an hour at these kinds of things every month or so.


--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Does the backporters team need help?

Mattia Rizzolo-2
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 06:44:29PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> The answer is clearly yes.  I've attempted a few times to pass off backports
> to someone new and apparently failed.  I'll be glad spend a few minutes
> getting you up to speed, but as I'm not involved in Ubuntu development
> anymore, I don't really have time for more than that.

I also wanted to join the team, and I had a few words with Scott about
that, but then failed at arranging the few minutes he is talking about…

Anyhow, I'm interested in the position just because I'm interested in
backports, but if somebody was to take care of approving the uploads,
etc, I'm more than happy to retract my proposition :)

--
regards,
                        Mattia Rizzolo

GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18  4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540      .''`.
more about me:  https://mapreri.org                             : :'  :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri                  `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia  `-

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Does the backporters team need help?

Micah Gersten-8


On April 24, 2017 5:51:02 PM CDT, Mattia Rizzolo <[hidden email]> wrote:

>On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 06:44:29PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> The answer is clearly yes.  I've attempted a few times to pass off
>backports
>> to someone new and apparently failed.  I'll be glad spend a few
>minutes
>> getting you up to speed, but as I'm not involved in Ubuntu
>development
>> anymore, I don't really have time for more than that.
>
>I also wanted to join the team, and I had a few words with Scott about
>that, but then failed at arranging the few minutes he is talking about…
>
>Anyhow, I'm interested in the position just because I'm interested in
>backports, but if somebody was to take care of approving the uploads,
>etc, I'm more than happy to retract my proposition :)

Yes, indeed, the team could use assistance.  I was on vacation and am catching up on things.  I would be happy to start getting more people involved starting next week.

Thanks,
Micah

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Does the backporters team need help?

Iain Lane-6
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 07:08:30PM -0500, Micah Gersten wrote:
> Yes, indeed, the team could use assistance.  I was on vacation and am
> catching up on things.  I would be happy to start getting more people
> involved starting next week.

I'm speaking as a member of the backporters team here.

The backports process relies on the small and overworked backports team
manually reviewing, uploading and then accepting uploads based on bug
reports which often come from users and require any amount of cajoling
(either back and forth with the reporter or actually doing the work) to
be uploadable.

The process is set up in such a way that there is a specific list of
things that the requests have to contain, a specific set of meanings for
bug statuses and a very onerous amount of testing required for
non-trivial backports. Any or all of these things can be wrong per the
policy, and they all make it very hard for the backporters team to
manage. A new member might manage to triage some percentage of the bugs,
but I suspect that very quickly they would get burned out with the
process like the rest of us.

I think it's proven to be a poor and unworkable process and it should be
fixed to enable more developer autonomy. That said, I don't have a new
proposal to make right now but I would be interested in trying to work
one out.

Cheers,

--
Iain Lane                                  [ [hidden email] ]
Debian Developer                                   [ [hidden email] ]
Ubuntu Developer                                   [ [hidden email] ]

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel

signature.asc (817 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Does the backporters team need help?

Clint Byrum-4
Excerpts from Iain Lane's message of 2017-04-25 09:18:31 +0100:

> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 07:08:30PM -0500, Micah Gersten wrote:
> > Yes, indeed, the team could use assistance.  I was on vacation and am
> > catching up on things.  I would be happy to start getting more people
> > involved starting next week.
>
> I'm speaking as a member of the backporters team here.
>
> The backports process relies on the small and overworked backports team
> manually reviewing, uploading and then accepting uploads based on bug
> reports which often come from users and require any amount of cajoling
> (either back and forth with the reporter or actually doing the work) to
> be uploadable.
>
> The process is set up in such a way that there is a specific list of
> things that the requests have to contain, a specific set of meanings for
> bug statuses and a very onerous amount of testing required for
> non-trivial backports. Any or all of these things can be wrong per the
> policy, and they all make it very hard for the backporters team to
> manage. A new member might manage to triage some percentage of the bugs,
> but I suspect that very quickly they would get burned out with the
> process like the rest of us.
>
> I think it's proven to be a poor and unworkable process and it should be
> fixed to enable more developer autonomy. That said, I don't have a new
> proposal to make right now but I would be interested in trying to work
> one out.

Indeed, it feels a bit heavy weight. I wonder if we could just make it
a little easier to become a backporter if you're already a developer.

That said, I'm happy to help a little bit on the current workload until
we can revamp backports. With Canonical's refocus and staff changes,
I think it's worthwhile for folks like myself to step up and help in
areas we find important.

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Does the backporters team need help?

Martin Pitt-2
Hello all,

Clint Byrum [2017-04-26 11:42 -0700]:

> Excerpts from Iain Lane's message of 2017-04-25 09:18:31 +0100:
> > The process is set up in such a way that there is a specific list of
> > things that the requests have to contain, a specific set of meanings for
> > bug statuses and a very onerous amount of testing required for
> > non-trivial backports. Any or all of these things can be wrong per the
> > policy, and they all make it very hard for the backporters team to
> > manage. A new member might manage to triage some percentage of the bugs,
> > but I suspect that very quickly they would get burned out with the
> > process like the rest of us.
> >
> > I think it's proven to be a poor and unworkable process and it should be
> > fixed to enable more developer autonomy. That said, I don't have a new
> > proposal to make right now but I would be interested in trying to work
> > one out.
>
> Indeed, it feels a bit heavy weight. I wonder if we could just make it
> a little easier to become a backporter if you're already a developer.

Agreed. This process is still from an age where we didn't have package sets
with their more fine-grained upload privileges, CLI tools for queue
review/management, etc.

As a first step t it might help to make the process similar to SRUs: After
filing the backport request bug, a developer could just go ahead and upload it
with "backportpackage" or "dput" by themselves -- it seems much simpler to me
as an archive admin/backports team member to review it from the +queue page and
just click accept than having to build/upload the backport by myself?

Pitti

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Does the backporters team need help?

Mattia Rizzolo-2
On Tue, May 02, 2017 at 03:26:12PM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
> As a first step t it might help to make the process similar to SRUs: After
> filing the backport request bug, a developer could just go ahead and upload it
> with "backportpackage" or "dput" by themselves -- it seems much simpler to me
> as an archive admin/backports team member to review it from the +queue page and
> just click accept than having to build/upload the backport by myself?

Totally agree.
I was actually quite shocking when I realized it didn't work like that.
As a proof that that actually works, that's how it's done in Debian
since about ever.

--
regards,
                        Mattia Rizzolo

GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18  4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540      .''`.
more about me:  https://mapreri.org                             : :'  :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri                  `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia  `-

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Does the backporters team need help?

Iain Lane-6
In reply to this post by Martin Pitt-2
On Tue, May 02, 2017 at 03:26:12PM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> Clint Byrum [2017-04-26 11:42 -0700]:
> > Excerpts from Iain Lane's message of 2017-04-25 09:18:31 +0100:
> > > The process is set up in such a way that there is a specific list of
> > > things that the requests have to contain, a specific set of meanings for
> > > bug statuses and a very onerous amount of testing required for
> > > non-trivial backports. Any or all of these things can be wrong per the
> > > policy, and they all make it very hard for the backporters team to
> > > manage. A new member might manage to triage some percentage of the bugs,
> > > but I suspect that very quickly they would get burned out with the
> > > process like the rest of us.
> > >
> > > I think it's proven to be a poor and unworkable process and it should be
> > > fixed to enable more developer autonomy. That said, I don't have a new
> > > proposal to make right now but I would be interested in trying to work
> > > one out.
> >
> > Indeed, it feels a bit heavy weight. I wonder if we could just make it
> > a little easier to become a backporter if you're already a developer.
>
> Agreed. This process is still from an age where we didn't have package sets
> with their more fine-grained upload privileges, CLI tools for queue
> review/management, etc.
>
> As a first step t it might help to make the process similar to SRUs: After
> filing the backport request bug, a developer could just go ahead and upload it
> with "backportpackage" or "dput" by themselves -- it seems much simpler to me
> as an archive admin/backports team member to review it from the +queue page and
> just click accept than having to build/upload the backport by myself?
That doesn't go far enough IMO, although I think it is essential to any
sustainable solution.

Actually uploading the backport is the easy part. The hard part is all
the verification that goes before it. The process requires explicit
testing of *all* reverse dependencies. That burden is on the reporter,
but it also falls on the ~ubuntu-backporters member to verify this and
push back if it's not been done.

So if we let anyone upload backports (actually the ACL for that is ~motu
so that's already more or less there) then we might shift the
unreasonable burden from one team to a larger team, but it will still be
there. And the smaller team will still have to police the unreasonable
process.

Again not a formal proposal, but I think that this extreme level of
paranoia should be removed from the process one way or another and be
replaced with some much simpler to comply with rules and appropriate
safety warnings. Debian manages to get by without being so prescriptive,
and we should be able to as well.

Cheers,

--
Iain Lane                                  [ [hidden email] ]
Debian Developer                                   [ [hidden email] ]
Ubuntu Developer                                   [ [hidden email] ]

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel

signature.asc (817 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Does the backporters team need help?

Robie Basak-4
On Tue, May 02, 2017 at 03:03:43PM +0100, Iain Lane wrote:
> Again not a formal proposal, but I think that this extreme level of
> paranoia should be removed from the process one way or another and be
> replaced with some much simpler to comply with rules and appropriate
> safety warnings. Debian manages to get by without being so prescriptive,
> and we should be able to as well.

+1. I think we're too far down the scale of careful at the cost of
usefulness for the backports pocket right now.

How about a backporters testing PPA? Stick it in ~ubuntu-motu perhaps.
Get stuff landed there first, and upload with no changes (except
version) to the backports pocket after some aging period with no
objections, and one report of some minimal level of testing success?

I don't feel strongly about the details of the above paragraph; I'm just
suggesting a starting point. Feel free to propose adjustments or change
everything entirely.

Robie

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel

signature.asc (836 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Does the backporters team need help?

Clint Byrum-4
In reply to this post by Iain Lane-6
Excerpts from Iain Lane's message of 2017-05-02 15:03:43 +0100:

> On Tue, May 02, 2017 at 03:26:12PM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > Clint Byrum [2017-04-26 11:42 -0700]:
> > > Excerpts from Iain Lane's message of 2017-04-25 09:18:31 +0100:
> > > > The process is set up in such a way that there is a specific list of
> > > > things that the requests have to contain, a specific set of meanings for
> > > > bug statuses and a very onerous amount of testing required for
> > > > non-trivial backports. Any or all of these things can be wrong per the
> > > > policy, and they all make it very hard for the backporters team to
> > > > manage. A new member might manage to triage some percentage of the bugs,
> > > > but I suspect that very quickly they would get burned out with the
> > > > process like the rest of us.
> > > >
> > > > I think it's proven to be a poor and unworkable process and it should be
> > > > fixed to enable more developer autonomy. That said, I don't have a new
> > > > proposal to make right now but I would be interested in trying to work
> > > > one out.
> > >
> > > Indeed, it feels a bit heavy weight. I wonder if we could just make it
> > > a little easier to become a backporter if you're already a developer.
> >
> > Agreed. This process is still from an age where we didn't have package sets
> > with their more fine-grained upload privileges, CLI tools for queue
> > review/management, etc.
> >
> > As a first step t it might help to make the process similar to SRUs: After
> > filing the backport request bug, a developer could just go ahead and upload it
> > with "backportpackage" or "dput" by themselves -- it seems much simpler to me
> > as an archive admin/backports team member to review it from the +queue page and
> > just click accept than having to build/upload the backport by myself?
>
> That doesn't go far enough IMO, although I think it is essential to any
> sustainable solution.
>
> Actually uploading the backport is the easy part. The hard part is all
> the verification that goes before it. The process requires explicit
> testing of *all* reverse dependencies. That burden is on the reporter,
> but it also falls on the ~ubuntu-backporters member to verify this and
> push back if it's not been done.
>
> So if we let anyone upload backports (actually the ACL for that is ~motu
> so that's already more or less there) then we might shift the
> unreasonable burden from one team to a larger team, but it will still be
> there. And the smaller team will still have to police the unreasonable
> process.
>
> Again not a formal proposal, but I think that this extreme level of
> paranoia should be removed from the process one way or another and be
> replaced with some much simpler to comply with rules and appropriate
> safety warnings. Debian manages to get by without being so prescriptive,
> and we should be able to as well.
>

How about a few blanket exceptions that robots could handle:

1) If the package does not exist in the target release, and is a
   no-change backport from a later stable release, auto-approve it.

2) If the package has no rdepends in the target release, and is from a
   later stable release, auto-approve it.

3) If the package's rdepends all have DEP8 tests, automatically run
   them with the uploaded binary, and if they pass, approve it.


(1) and (2) can be done with a cron job and the launchpad API/madison.
(3) would require some development I think, to hookup backports to DEP8
testing.

Just looking at xenial-backports, (1) has two candidates in the queue
right now: cockpit, and bubblewrap (Full disclosure: I need this last
one for my day-job).

(2) has a few that I can see as candidates from bindeps (there may be builddeps)

  ardour
  camo
  codeblocks
  dolphin-emu
  gramps
  julia
  shibboleth-sp2
  mame
  nautilus-admin
  sslh

So, assuming those are all no-change backports, adopting those two might
take the current queue from 44 to 32. I see a few in the 44 that are
outright nopes, like libgcrypt and poppler.

I'd be open to writing these cron jobs, though I don't know where they'd
run, they'd need LP access to auto-approve stuff.

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Loading...