[CentOS-devel] subversion / CS8 update / status of workflow

On 05.08.21 02:07, Carl George wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 8:28 AM Leon Fauster via CentOS-devel
> <centos-devel at centos.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> inspired by a different thread here, I did a dnf distro-sync on
>> a CS8 node and noticed that subversion would be downgraded:
>>
>> from
>> subversion-1.10.2-4.module_el8.3.0+703+ba2f61b7
>> to
>> subversion-1.10.2-3.module_el8.3.0+393+21cd8ae8
>>
>> Coming from C8 and swapping the repos to CS8 leads to this
>> situation (especially when doing upgrade instead of distro-sync)
>> but that is not my point.
>>
>> The above downgrade path recovered that subversion in CS8 still
>> does not have
>>
>> # rpm -q --changelog
>> subversion-1.10.2-4.module_el8.3.0+703+ba2f61b7.x86_64 | head -3
>> * Mi Feb 10 2021 Joe Orton <jorton at redhat.com> - 1.10.2-4
>> - add security fix for CVE-2020-17525
>>
>>
>> Such question comes here and there again and again. How
>> does the package update process in CS8 looks like? Is the
>> process mature, any glitches. This subversion update already
>> exists in C8 since February. Why is it not incorporated into CS8?
>>
>> Would CentOS Stream only be promoted as "upstream" development
>> platform, then ... but its also promoted as successor of CentOS
>> Linux for people with production fleeds.
>>
>> I do not argue that C8S should be like C8 (in a wider sense) but
>> at least it should have some basal property (like updates are at
>> most after 1 or 2 month all there or so ...).
>>
>>
>> Any insight about the goal of the current process? Any wiki or doc page
>> for that? Some transparency would be my main goal, to have base for
>> decisions ...
>>
>> I'd really appreciate any feedback.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Leon
>>
 > Thanks for bringing this to our attention.  This is a mistake on the
 > CentOS side.  I verified that we should have this module build in both
 > c8 and c8s.  I've tagged the c8 module build for the c8s compose and
 > it will be included in the next compose.
 >
 > I'll be blunt and say that the process for stream 8 is not mature.
 > There are glitches like this.  It's all a byproduct of bolting on the
 > Stream workflows after the RHEL8 workflows were already established.
 > For Stream 9 the workflows are the RHEL workflows, and the RHEL
 > maintainers will be directly responsible for their packages.  Stream 8
 > is still technically a rebuild, it's just a rebuild of 8.X+1 content
 > instead of 8.X.  The basic process for Stream 8 works something like
 > this.
 >
 > - RHEL maintainer creates an internal build
 > - Internal build passes gating tests
 > - RHEL maintainer attaches build to errata
 > - Sources exported to c8s branch on git.centos.org
 > - CentOS maintainer rebuilds the sources
 > - CentOS maintainer generates new compose and runs t_functional test
 > suite against it
 > - CentOS maintainer publishes the new compose containing the update
 >
 > It's absolutely true that the end goal is for CentOS to become the
 > upstream of RHEL.  It's also true that it is a work in progress.



Thank you for the honest reply ... I am already looking into CS9 and
hopefully the signed packages will be published this month.


--
Leon