Bug 698656

Summary: Broken dependency on deprecated hal
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Nicola Soranzo <nsoranzo>
Component: beldiAssignee: Christoph Wickert <cwickert>
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: rawhideCC: cwickert, redhat-bugzilla
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: 0.9.26-2.fc16 Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
: 707783 (view as bug list) Environment:
Last Closed: 2011-05-25 18:32:21 EDT Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:

Description Nicola Soranzo 2011-04-21 09:34:42 EDT
Description of problem:
Since HAL has been deprecated upstream for 3 years, Fedora is removing it from the
distribution:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/HalRemoval

The hal package is already deprecated and blocked from composes for rawhide.

Therefore, there are some broken dependencies for your package now:

beldi-0.9.25-3.fc15.i686 requires libhal.so.1
beldi-0.9.25-3.fc15.i686 requires libhal-storage.so.1
beldi-0.9.25-3.fc15.i686 requires hal

If these dependencies cannot be removed, this package should probably be
deprecated as well:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
beldi-0.9.25-3.fc15
Comment 1 Christoph Wickert 2011-04-21 10:02:15 EDT
(In reply to comment #0)
> Description of problem:
> Since HAL has been deprecated upstream for 3 years, Fedora is removing it from
> the
> distribution:
> 
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/HalRemoval

Who made this decision? This feature was never approved!
Comment 2 Nicola Soranzo 2011-04-21 10:21:08 EDT
(In reply to comment #1)
> (In reply to comment #0)
> > Description of problem:
> > Since HAL has been deprecated upstream for 3 years, Fedora is removing it from
> > the
> > distribution:
> > 
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/HalRemoval
> 
> Who made this decision? This feature was never approved!

The decision to deprecate hal package was made by its mantainer:

http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2011-March/149538.html

This is the link to the rel-eng ticket to block from composes:

https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/4557

This Feature is targeted for Fedora 16, that's why it is not approved yet.
Comment 3 Christoph Wickert 2011-04-21 11:01:48 EDT
(In reply to comment #2)
 
> The decision to deprecate hal package was made by its mantainer:
> 
> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2011-March/149538.html

I know that mail, but this mail is only about retiring the package. Somebody else could still pick it up.

> This is the link to the rel-eng ticket to block from composes:
> 
> https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/4557

I don't think that Richard is in the position to make this call without approval from FESCO. As long as many packages in the distro still rely on HAL it must not be blocked.

It is the packager's responsibility to notify the owners of affected packages *before* this change is made and help them to fix this issues [1]. This has not happened, Richard only announced he will retire it.

> This Feature is targeted for Fedora 16, that's why it is not approved yet.

In this case you should
- update the wiki page to reflect the current status
- request approval form FESCO
- file bugs once it the feature is approved

[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_maintainer_responsibilities#Notify_others_of_changes_that_may_affect_their_packages
Comment 4 Nicola Soranzo 2011-04-21 11:30:24 EDT
(In reply to comment #3)
> > This is the link to the rel-eng ticket to block from composes:
> > 
> > https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/4557
> 
> I don't think that Richard is in the position to make this call without
> approval from FESCO. As long as many packages in the distro still rely on HAL
> it must not be blocked.
> 
> It is the packager's responsibility to notify the owners of affected packages
> *before* this change is made and help them to fix this issues [1]. This has not
> happened, Richard only announced he will retire it.

I cannot do anything about that, you should complain to Richard and RelEng.
 
> > This Feature is targeted for Fedora 16, that's why it is not approved yet.
> 
> In this case you should
> - update the wiki page to reflect the current status
> - request approval form FESCO

The "Targeted release" field is set to {{FedoraVersion||next}} and will automatically update when F15 will be released. At the point the new Feature process will begin and I will request FESCO approval.

> - file bugs once it the feature is approved

The broken dependency is already present in rawhide: that's the primary reason for this bug.

In fact, the Feature aims at removing hal from the Desktop Spin, not the whole distribution. I linked to the page to give some context to maintainers, but it was Richard's decision to deprecate the package.
Comment 5 Christoph Wickert 2011-04-21 11:43:04 EDT
(In reply to comment #4)
> The "Targeted release" field is set to {{FedoraVersion||next}} and will
> automatically update when F15 will be released. 

This is the bad idea because the feature page will automatically after every release and we need an archived version of the page for the release that contained the feature.

> At the point the new Feature
> process will begin and I will request FESCO approval.

The feature process always open. Deadlines only mark the end but not the beginning. You can request early approval all the time.

> > - file bugs once it the feature is approved
> 
> The broken dependency is already present in rawhide: that's the primary reason
> for this bug.

The dependency is only broken because HAL was removed without reasonable notification and discussion.

I am aware of the broken dependency already because of the daily nag mails, so there is really no need for this bug if it doesn't solve another purpose, e.g. planing and coordination of a complete HAL removal.

> In fact, the Feature aims at removing hal from the Desktop Spin, not the whole
> distribution.

In this case you should not file bugs on packages that are not in the desktop spin either.
Comment 6 Nicola Soranzo 2011-04-21 14:57:16 EDT
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > The "Targeted release" field is set to {{FedoraVersion||next}} and will
> > automatically update when F15 will be released. 
> 
> This is the bad idea because the feature page will automatically after every
> release and we need an archived version of the page for the release that
> contained the feature.

Right, Feature page fixed.

> > At the point the new Feature
> > process will begin and I will request FESCO approval.
> 
> The feature process always open. Deadlines only mark the end but not the
> beginning. You can request early approval all the time.
> 
> > > - file bugs once it the feature is approved
> > 
> > The broken dependency is already present in rawhide: that's the primary reason
> > for this bug.
> 
> The dependency is only broken because HAL was removed without reasonable
> notification and discussion.
> 
> I am aware of the broken dependency already because of the daily nag mails, so
> there is really no need for this bug if it doesn't solve another purpose, e.g.
> planing and coordination of a complete HAL removal.
> 
> > In fact, the Feature aims at removing hal from the Desktop Spin, not the whole distribution.
> 
> In this case you should not file bugs on packages that are not in the desktop
> spin either.

I thought that this bug would be useful to inform the maintainer that:
1) HAL is deprecated upstream and all distributions want to move to the better alternatives;
1) hal package is not FTBFS, it's been deprecated by its maintainer and blocked from composes. So, unless somebody volunteer to maintain it, you need to remove the dependency.
Moreover, if nobody volunteer to maintain hal, the Feature scope may be expanded to the whole distribution and this bug will track its progress.
Comment 7 Christoph Wickert 2011-05-25 17:13:33 EDT
I had spoken to upstream recently and he released 0.9.26 last week to get rif of HAL.

How about adding one central tracking bug for the HAL removal feature?
Comment 8 Nicola Soranzo 2011-05-25 18:02:47 EDT
(In reply to comment #7)
> I had spoken to upstream recently and he released 0.9.26 last week to get rid
> of HAL.

Thank you, Christoph!
Unfortunately, beldi still requires hal. In fact, you removed from the spec:

BuildRequires: hal-devel >= 0.5.10

but there is still the line:

Requires:      hal

> How about adding one central tracking bug for the HAL removal feature?

Actually I'm tracking the bugs in the Feature page.
Adding also a tracking bug is certainly an option, but only 11 packages remain to be fixed.
Comment 9 Christoph Wickert 2011-05-25 18:32:21 EDT
(In reply to comment #8)
> but there is still the line:
> 
> Requires:      hal

Ouch, good catch. Fixed in 
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3092812

> Actually I'm tracking the bugs in the Feature page.
> Adding also a tracking bug is certainly an option, but only 11 packages remain
> to be fixed.

I strongly suggest a tracker bug that blocks the F16-target bug. Use the power of bugzilla! ;)