Re: Request to fast track gitlab dependencies
Hi.
On 3/4/19 1:04 PM, Pirate Praveen wrote:
> On 2019, മാർച്ച് 4 3:01:17 PM IST, Thorsten Glaser <t.glaser@tarent.de> wrote:
>> On Mon, 4 Mar 2019, Pirate Praveen wrote:
>>
>>> The bug that caused removal from testing was a meta bug to keep
>> gitlab
>>> out of buster. If that can be considered a valid excuse to keep
>> gitlab
>>> in stretch-backports, please do. The package in backports-new fixes
>>
>> Please read again the backports rules.
>
> I get it now, religiously following rules is valued more than solving a real problem for Free Software and our users. For many, keeping gitlab out of stretch-backports is a better solution even though its in a perfectly fine shape. For them, it does not matter the reason for removal from testing.
It would had been nice if you could keep it on a constructive level.
Seemingly it isn't in a perfectly fine shape, otherwise the security
team concerns wouldn't be there. And if you have an issue with the
security team's opinion you should probably engage in discussion with
them instead of claiming it to be unfair on an unrelated list. It's
been months since, did you try to discuss it with the security team, and
either understand their concerns or help them to lift it?
> On hindsight, I could have done the following with disregard for other team concerns and still be within rules.
>
> 1. Close that bug as bogus as it was not a real bug.
With that reasoning you disregard the stable release team on top, too.
> 2. Not bother with rails 5 transition, which would have allowed keeping gitlab in buster and stretch-backports.
Sometimes bigger transitions should get put into bigger perspective.
It was done in a quite close timeframe, and if it cause troubles and
there is no time left for it to weed out, please learn from that and
potentially avoid such situation in the future.
> I will take this as a lesson and stop bothering with helping anything I don't strictly need for gitlab.
I'm sorry that you feel that way, and while I've been in such
frustrated states myself, it doesn't leave much space to learn from the
experience and move forward.
> I uploaded rails 5 to unstable fully knowing it will break gitlab, as I didn't want to keep rails in a bad shape in buster.
If you know that then the timeframe for fixing it was very badly timed.
Sometimes things should get weighted against each other. And given
that the security team's concerns weren't addressed I believe it was the
better choice to get rails in shape than gitlab, even though that's a
missing piece now. :/
>> If it's not in buster it naturally cannot be in stretch-backports.
>>
>
> By such strict interpretation, that bug was clearly bogus as well.
No, it wasn't. It is very much within the rights of the security team
to raise such concerns. If you don't address them then please don't
call them bogus, given that the security team does hell of a job for
keeping stable in a secure and stable shape.
I'm a bit disappointed that you didn't seem to have learned from the
discussions we had a few months ago, and seemingly haven't done much to
improve the situation. At least it doesn't look like it from over here. :/
Sorry that we got into that messy state, but we were frankly clear on
it, and like it seems little has changed.
So long,
Rhonda
Reply to: