[CentOS-devel] specspo issue

Brandon Davidson brandond at uoregon.edu
Mon Apr 6 23:14:01 UTC 2009



R P Herrold wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Apr 2009, Brandon Davidson wrote:
> 
>> I'm moving this here from from the QA list. For those who 
>> missed the original thread, it's linked from the bug report.
> 
> Not fixing the subject, sadly.  no RPM issue here; possibly a 
> patching strategy issue in specspo

I kept the subject (and hopefully the references too) in hopes that it might 
keep the threading for anyone that was following it across lists. If you want to 
change the header, this might be more helpful (and a little less reproachful too).

> and a couple more things jump out at me.  By and large, I see 
> NO dark art here, requiring that such a review and proposed 
> fix cannot be done by anyone, diffing the present upstream 
> original and the last shipped patches (once CentOS variant 
> SRPMs are retrievable), and ...

Hey, just because I have time to track it down for a user on the forum and file 
a bug doesn't mean I have time to fix it ;) I agree, though, it doesn't look too 
difficult to correct the immediate issue. It looks like the original patch is 
from hughesjr; I'll keep an eye out for the 5.3 SRPMs and submit a patch if I 
have time.

> frankly, who _cares_ to install packages which ** cannot ** 
> work as upstream does not release the server side sources for 
> the RHN, such that we cannot replicate it (it not being clear 
> that we have a desire as a project to so proceed)

My point was that we are providing translations for packages that we don't ship, 
and contributing to the confusion of users that do install those packages on 
their own. IMHO the 'right' thing do to would be to make sure that any package 
listed as removed in the CentOS release notes is also stripped out of the 
translations.

For bonus points, we could also make sure that any other changes made to 
descriptions or summaries are synchronized into specspo; this would probably 
require checking the packages listed in the release notes' modified list, 
comparing them to what's in specspo, and running them past the translation team 
as necessary.

This of course assumes that Red Hat keeps specspo relatively up to date with the 
actual packages' text, which may be a lot to assume.

-- 
Brandon Davidson
Systems Administrator
University of Oregon Neuroinformatics Center
(541) 346-2417 brandond at uoregon.edu
Key Fingerprint 1F08 A331 78DF 1EFE F645 8AE5 8FBE 4147 E351 E139


More information about the CentOS-devel mailing list