[Bug 539] Review request: mythtv-status - Get the current status of your MythTV system at the command line
10:18 p.m.
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=539
Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |sergio(a)serjux.com
--- Comment #15 from Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com> 2016-02-25 23:18:53 CET ---
(In reply to comment #14)
Antonio Trande apparently knew better how to handle this during the
build
system migration, and is updating mythtv-status. My request here is no longer
meaningful.
you may maintain this package please read :
http://rpmfusion.org/Contributors_github
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
10:22 p.m.
New subject: Package assignment
RPM Fusion Bugzilla:
--- Comment #15 from Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com>
2016-02-25 23:18:53 CET ---
you may maintain this package please read :
http://rpmfusion.org/Contributors_github
As I understand that page, the updates are currently not reserved to
any package maintainer. Anyone can make a git fork, and then request
an update in a bugzilla. I guess the manual step of pulling that fork
will include a judgement if someone is doing something silly.
Have I got this right?
If so, how is default bugzilla owner assigned these days? That was
the other part of becoming a maintainer of a package as I understood
it. Is there a way to transfer that nowadays, or will that be done
when other more urgent infrastructure work is done?
(If assignments are still done, I am willing to take over
mythtv-status maintenance, since the previous maintainer has stepped
down: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3594#c1 What I
wanted to do right now has already been done by Antonia and Sérgio,
but I can keep an eye on this in the future. Should be pretty easy
considering the quite calm development rate.:-))
2:50 a.m.
New subject: Package assignment
On Dom, 2016-02-28 at 23:22 +0100, Göran Uddeborg wrote:
RPM Fusion Bugzilla:
>
> --- Comment #15 from Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com> 2016-02-25
> 23:18:53 CET ---
>
> you may maintain this package please read :
> http://rpmfusion.org/Contributors_github
As I understand that page, the updates are currently not reserved to
any package maintainer. Anyone can make a git fork, and then request
an update in a bugzilla. I guess the manual step of pulling that
fork
will include a judgement if someone is doing something silly.
Have I got this right?
yes and no, package manager is the man which should do the updates ,
but if is not responsive, we open one bugzilla ticket and wait some
time, after, it is allowed receive updates from other people. And yes,
when we merge pull request, we verify if is not something silly ,
preferably just simple and stable updates .
If so, how is default bugzilla owner assigned these days? That was
the other part of becoming a maintainer of a package as I understood
it. Is there a way to transfer that nowadays, or will that be done
when other more urgent infrastructure work is done?
(If assignments are still done, I am willing to take over
mythtv-status maintenance, since the previous maintainer has stepped
down: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3594#c1 What I
wanted to do right now has already been done by Antonia and Sérgio,
but I can keep an eye on this in the future. Should be pretty easy
considering the quite calm development rate.:-))
You may request on sysadmin(a)lists.rpmfusion.org , emmanuel Seyman can
change the default assign for the bugzilla component, but I can't
guarantee if process works or not , depends on others opinions and may
have implications that I'm not aware.
Well bugzilla have good tools to search and you can save the searches.
I saved some searches like monitor all bugs that are opened on "Fedora
product"
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&list_i
d=9003&bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_st
atus=REOPENED&product=Fedora
Last but not least, do you approve the update (as the maintainer of the
package) ?
https://github.com/rpmfusion/mythtv-status/commit/b51e05c76bcb2ad82e3c0
787d5bc4d53a931d674
Thanks,
--
Sérgio M. B.
5:57 p.m.
New subject: Package assignment
Sérgio Basto:
Well bugzilla have good tools to search and you can save the
searches.
Sure, but if possible I prefer to get an interrupt when things happen,
rather than having to poll. :-)
Last but not least, do you approve the update (as the maintainer of
the
package) ?
https://github.com/rpmfusion/mythtv-status/commit/b51e05c76bcb2ad82e3c0
787d5bc4d53a931d674
Reading a patch of a patch was an interesting experience. :-)
Overall, it looks fine. I have two comments:
1. The comment "Add mythtv status to end of stub" in
mythtv-update-motd that previously existed in the patch could have
been left in. No big deal, though.
2. Why is it necessary to throw away standard error of the
mythtv-status command in mythtv-update-motd? It isn't new in this
version, but the line is modified so I noted. (Maybe that is more a
question for Susi Lehtola. Cc:ing explicitly in case no longer a
subscriber.)
6:34 p.m.
New subject: Package assignment
On Ter, 2016-03-01 at 18:57 +0100, Göran Uddeborg wrote:
Sérgio Basto:
>
> Well bugzilla have good tools to search and you can save the
> searches.
Sure, but if possible I prefer to get an interrupt when things
happen,
rather than having to poll. :-)
>
> Last but not least, do you approve the update (as the maintainer of
> the
> package) ?
> https://github.com/rpmfusion/mythtv-status/commit/b51e05c76bcb2ad82
> e3c0
> 787d5bc4d53a931d674
Reading a patch of a patch was an interesting experience. :-)
you may read final result :
https://github.com/rpmfusion/mythtv-status/blob/master/mythtv-status.spec
Overall, it looks fine. I have two comments:
1. The comment "Add mythtv status to end of stub" in
mythtv-update-motd that previously existed in the patch could have
been left in. No big deal, though.
2. Why is it necessary to throw away standard error of the
mythtv-status command in mythtv-update-motd? It isn't new in this
version, but the line is modified so I noted. (Maybe that is more a
question for Susi Lehtola. Cc:ing explicitly in case no longer a
subscriber.)
Can you fork git@github.com:rpmfusion/mythtv-status.git and do a pull
request? please.
Thanks,
--
Sérgio M. B.
8:34 p.m.
New subject: Package assignment
Sérgio Basto:
you may read final result :
https://github.com/rpmfusion/mythtv-status/blob/master/mythtv-status.spec
That's what I did. (More precisely, I cloned from github and looked
at local files. I find that more convenient.
Can you fork git@github.com:rpmfusion/mythtv-status.git and do a
pull
request? please.
Antonio Trande:
As provisional maintainer, I (or Sergio) cannot be familiar with all
packages and know how they work. Collaboration is essential.
Maybe my my question about throwing away standard error came across as
rethoric. But it wasn't meant that way. I genuinely wonder, and for
that reason I cc:ed Susi. I'm not sure enough to actually propose a
change yet, I wanted to first understand why it was done the way it
was originally.
9:29 p.m.
New subject: Package assignment
On Ter, 2016-03-01 at 21:34 +0100, Göran Uddeborg wrote:
Sérgio Basto:
>
> you may read final result :
> https://github.com/rpmfusion/mythtv-status/blob/master/mythtv-statu
> s.spec
That's what I did. (More precisely, I cloned from github and looked
at local files. I find that more convenient.
So you may, attach the "git diff > mystatus.patch " to bugzilla #3594
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3594
Thanks !
>
> Can you fork git@github.com:rpmfusion/mythtv-status.git and do a
> pull
> request? please.
Antonio Trande:
>
> As provisional maintainer, I (or Sergio) cannot be familiar with
> all
> packages and know how they work. Collaboration is essential.
Maybe my my question about throwing away standard error came across
as
rethoric. But it wasn't meant that way. I genuinely wonder, and for
that reason I cc:ed Susi. I'm not sure enough to actually propose a
change yet, I wanted to first understand why it was done the way it
was originally.
--
Sérgio M. B.
6:34 p.m.
New subject: Package assignment
On Tue, 2016-03-01 at 18:57 +0100, Göran Uddeborg wrote:
Sérgio Basto:
>
> Well bugzilla have good tools to search and you can save the
> searches.
Sure, but if possible I prefer to get an interrupt when things
happen,
rather than having to poll. :-)
>
> Last but not least, do you approve the update (as the maintainer of
> the
> package) ?
> https://github.com/rpmfusion/mythtv-status/commit/b51e05c76bcb2ad82
> e3c0
> 787d5bc4d53a931d674
Reading a patch of a patch was an interesting experience. :-)
Overall, it looks fine. I have two comments:
1. The comment "Add mythtv status to end of stub" in
mythtv-update-motd that previously existed in the patch could have
been left in. No big deal, though.
2. Why is it necessary to throw away standard error of the
mythtv-status command in mythtv-update-motd? It isn't new in this
version, but the line is modified so I noted. (Maybe that is more a
question for Susi Lehtola. Cc:ing explicitly in case no longer a
subscriber.)
'mythtv-status' package has been updated by me; if something is not
good (and probably there is something), original maintainer/s of
package, temporarily busy with other business, should kindly at least
check all changes before definitive approval.
As provisional maintainer, I (or Sergio) cannot be familiar with all
packages and know how they work. Collaboration is essential.
--
---
Antonio Trande
mailto: sagitter 'at' fedoraproject 'dot' org
http://fedoraos.wordpress.com/
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Sagitter
GPG Key: 0x6CE6D08A
Check on https://keys.fedoraproject.org/
2972
days inactive
2977
days old
rpmfusion-developers@lists.rpmfusion.org
7 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Antonio Trande -
Göran Uddeborg -
RPM Fusion Bugzilla -
Sérgio Basto