Latest upstream release: 0.1.14 Current version/release in rawhide: 0.1.13-8.fc26 URL: http://nice.freedesktop.org/releases/ Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy More information about the service that created this bug can be found at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added upstream. Based on the information from anitya: https://release-monitoring.org/project/1683/
Created attachment 1268511 [details] [patch] Update to 0.1.14 (#1438620)
hotness's scratch build of libnice-0.1.14-1.el7.src.rpm for rawhide failed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=18772805
Created attachment 1276170 [details] Update to 0.1.14 Added BR gnutl-devel >= 2.12.0 which is required for 0.1.14. I've uploaded the 0.1.14 tarball already, but I do not have commit rights for libnice. Successful scratch build from SRPM with this change included: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=19392980
This update was done over 5 months ago. Any reason not to progress this into rawhide (and backport to at least F27)?
I have just confirmed that updating to 0.1.14 resolves bug #1516442.
I don't see any reason not to update it in Rawhide. Should be able to do that in a day or so when I get some free cycles.
Sorry to nag: it has been a month but I still don't see any builds on koji or bodhi...
I will take care of the update in rawhide.
(In reply to Stefan Becker from comment #3) > Created attachment 1276170 [details] > Update to 0.1.14 Stefan, I have pushed the change on your behalf: https://src.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/libnice.git/commit/?id=3feabe3b Thanks for the patch!
Thanks, but simply updating rawhide is not enough. At least push the change to F27 too.
Created attachment 1387881 [details] update to 0.1.14-70-gfb2f1f7 with alternate server fixes for SIPE ...unfortunately I learned in the last few days from the SIPE media developer that for many Skype-for-Business users an update to plain 0.1.14 isn't enough anymore. I'm attaching my proposed patch to bring the package up to 0.1.14-70-gfb2f1f7 which includes fixes to the alternate server handling. There is currently another debugging round going on, so I expect that there might be even more fixes to libnice coming up. If you want me to open another error for this change then please tell me.
(In reply to Stefan Becker from comment #10) > At least push the change to F27 too. Fedora 27 is a stable release. The policy for stable Fedora releases is much stricter than for Fedora rawhide: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy#Stable_Releases Could you please review the changes in 0.1.14 (or even 0.1.14-70-gfb2f1f7) and confirm that such an update does not violate the policy? (In reply to Stefan Becker from comment #11) > Created attachment 1387881 [details] > update to 0.1.14-70-gfb2f1f7 with alternate server fixes for SIPE That is an update to the latest upstream git HEAD as I understand it. > I'm attaching my proposed patch to bring the package up to > 0.1.14-70-gfb2f1f7 which includes fixes to the alternate server handling. Thanks for the patch! I would prefer to change also the NVR (Name Version Release) to make it obvious that we are packaging a snapshot of the upstream SCM: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Versioning#Snapshots Also the patch would be more pleasant to work with if it was generated by git format-patch directly from the upstream git (instead of squashing all changes together). I am able to implement both the changes myself, no need to resubmit the patch. Still I would appreciate your review of the request for updating the stable Fedora releases.
(In reply to Kamil Dudka from comment #12) > > Fedora 27 is a stable release. The policy for stable Fedora releases is > much stricter than for Fedora rawhide: This bug has been opened against F26, so 0.1.14 should have been in in F27 if it would have been dealt with in a timely fashion, IMHO (I know, this is not your fault). > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy#Stable_Releases There is no API change, i.e. on my F27 system I simply replaced the package and f.ex. pidgin-sipe package continued to work without recompilation. > That is an update to the latest upstream git HEAD as I understand it. Yes. > Thanks for the patch! I would prefer to change also the NVR (Name Version > Release) to make it obvious that we are packaging a snapshot of the upstream > SCM: Sure. But that policy wasn't followed earlier (see below) > Also the patch would be more pleasant to work with if it was generated by > git format-patch directly from the upstream git (instead of squashing all > changes together). Again, I was just following earlier precedence, e.g. https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libnice/c/24424c5121b3187f4756f7579f4ff04f2a15f4f4 If this a real issue I will spend some time to collect the important bugfix patches from upstream.
Created attachment 1388030 [details] rawhide: add a few selected fixes from upstream Unfortunately the libnice git history does not show what is a bug fix and what a new feature. So I reverted to only cherry-pick the 3 changes I *do know* are important for now. They apply & compile cleanly ontop of 0.1.14. NOTE: please do not commit this yet. I will have to wait for the current debugging session to complete to know if there are more fixes necessary. If those additional fixes solve my current SIPE issue, then I will also be able to verify this reduced set of patches.
Created attachment 1388031 [details] f27: update to 0.1.14 plus a few selected upstream fixes The same changes as on master, but for F27. This is what I have currently installed on my machine and the code seems to be working. But as I said my current SIPE issue isn't fixed yet, so please do not commit this yet.
(In reply to Stefan Becker from comment #13) > > Thanks for the patch! I would prefer to change also the NVR (Name Version > > Release) to make it obvious that we are packaging a snapshot of the upstream > > SCM: > > Sure. But that policy wasn't followed earlier (see below) > > > Also the patch would be more pleasant to work with if it was generated by > > git format-patch directly from the upstream git (instead of squashing all > > changes together). > > Again, I was just following earlier precedence, e.g. > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libnice/c/ > 24424c5121b3187f4756f7579f4ff04f2a15f4f4 So David Woodhouse preferred to release libnice-0.1.13-5, which was a snapshot of the upstream SCM, without reflecting the fact in NVR. And he preferred to have all the commits squashed together. I am happy he did it because it was better than keeping the package broken. Nevertheless, I prefer to distinguish packaging of stable releases and packaging of SCM snapshots, and I prefer to work with patches dumped by git format-patch. So what about using your attachment #1388031 [details] for f26 and f27 and using the (properly marked) snapshot of upstream SCM for rawhide? Does it work for you? Of course, you do not need to resubmit anything. I am able to push the changes once there is an agreement on what to push...
(In reply to Kamil Dudka from comment #16) > So what about using your attachment #1388031 [details] for f26 and f27 and > using the (properly marked) snapshot of upstream SCM for rawhide? Does it > work for you? As I do not know what the possible changes look like I can't say if it is enough to update F26/F27 to 0.1.14 plus selected patches, or if they also need to move to 0.1.14 upstream SCM. Maybe for starters you simply should push F26/F27 to 0.1.14 without patches, which would address the intention of this bug. Moving to upstream SCM (full or with selected set of fixes) on all branches would then be another bug.
(In reply to Stefan Becker from comment #17) > Maybe for starters you simply should push F26/F27 to 0.1.14 without patches, > which would address the intention of this bug. OK, will do. Thanks for the feedback!
libnice-0.1.14-1.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-768833510d
libnice-0.1.14-1.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-c5f12c40ff
libnice-0.1.14-1.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-c5f12c40ff
libnice-0.1.14-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-768833510d
*** Bug 1516442 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
libnice-0.1.14-1.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
libnice-0.1.14-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.