Bug 1267305
| Summary: | Upgrade perl-IPTables-Parse to 1.5 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Petr Pisar <ppisar> |
| Component: | perl-IPTables-Parse | Assignee: | Miloslav Trmač <mitr> |
| Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | emmanuel, mitr, perl-devel, tremble |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | FutureFeature |
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | perl-IPTables-Parse-1.5-1.fc24 | Doc Type: | Enhancement |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2015-09-29 17:46:19 UTC | Type: | Bug |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
Petr Pisar
2015-09-29 15:08:46 UTC
Thanks updated. I have a personal setup monitoring for upstream changes, and you seem to already have configured the-new-hotness to notify me. A _third_ way to nag me about a release seems rather unnecessary. (In reply to Miloslav Trmač from comment #1) > I have a personal setup monitoring for upstream changes, It looks like your setup is lacking 3 weeks behind the upstream. > and you seem to already have configured the-new-hotness to notify me. No, I haven't. I configured release monitoring which is not the-new-hotness. The-new-hotness, reporting bugs to Bugzilla, is has a separate knob at <https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/perl-IPTables-Parse/>. No, my setup has noticed this on Sep 9. If $you personally need an update, do file a bug and I’ll do my best. I am not going to get into the habit of dropping all my work and rebasing a package immediately just because a bot has found something to upgrade if no human cares. (In reply to Miloslav Trmač from comment #3) > > If $you personally need an update, do file a bug and I’ll do my best. Note that this is exactly what has happened. Petr wanted rawhide to be updated and filed a bug requesting you to do so. > I am not going to get into the habit of dropping all my work and rebasing a > package immediately just because a bot has found something to upgrade if no > human cares. By and large, we're better served if rawhide is kept relatively current. Perl modules have dependency chains that can require very recent modules. Plus, the more often a module is updated, the less differences there are between a working and failing build root. (In reply to Emmanuel Seyman from comment #4) > (In reply to Miloslav Trmač from comment #3) > > > > If $you personally need an update, do file a bug and I’ll do my best. > > Note that this is exactly what has happened. > Petr wanted rawhide to be updated and filed a bug requesting you to do so. Sure. > > I am not going to get into the habit of dropping all my work and rebasing a > > package immediately just because a bot has found something to upgrade if no > > human cares. > > By and large, we're better served if rawhide is kept relatively current. By and large we’re also better served if every task does not take twice as long due to interruptions and context switching ☺ There’s a balance to be struck. As I said, I am fine with new release notification, I just think that I am being already sufficiently notified. |