Re: Proposal: gate all stable release updates on rmdepcheck

On Thu, Jul 09, 2026 at 10:41:07AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 09, 2026 at 04:27:19PM +0100, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > 
> > For Rawhide I have a now-less-Sekrit Plan:
> > 
> > https://forge.fedoraproject.org/releng/tooling/src/branch/main/quality-assurance/critpath/ccp.py
> > 
> > that's a script that produces a list of "compose-critical packages",
> > i.e. the packages which are used to build, or are included in, the non-
> > failable images in the latest compose. My plan for Rawhide/Branched is
> > to gate updates only if they break the dependencies of any compose-
> > critical package, rather than gating on *all* failures.
> > 
> > That still requires a bit work, though. I need to get something to
> > expose the compose-critical package data in a convenient way, and it's
> > probably Bodhi, since it's Bodhi that stores and exposes the critical
> > path package list (and I want Bodhi to use compose-critical package
> > info for other reasons too). Then I have to adjust rmdepcheck and/or
> > the CI pipeline to somehow make it convenient to distinguish between a
> > 'ccp' and 'non-ccp' failure...
> > 
> > I suppose we *could* decide it's fine to gate Rawhide on all rmdepcheck
> > failures and just require people to waive cases where they
> > intentionally break other deps? Meh. I dunno.
> 
> Conceptually, that sounds fine to me... if you know you are breaking
> deps for some reason (thing not ready, but very leaf node, etc) doing a
> waiver to note that would make sense too.
> 
> However, it does mean you (and anyone who watches waivers) will probibly
> see more that you need to look at and see if they look reasonable.
> 
> Is there any easy way to be notified on all waivers? 
> 
> If we do decide to go that route, we should probibly have a flag day we
> announce in advance to give people time to know it's coming and when.

Rather than having a small set of people who attempt to watch all waivers,
IMHO, it would be better if we introduced a "2 person rule" for anything
tagged as a critical path package. ie any update that is waiving broken
deps should require approval from someone other than the person submitting
it before getting into the compose.

With regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com       ~~        https://hachyderm.io/@berrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org          ~~          https://entangle-photo.org :|
|: https://pixelfed.art/berrange   ~~    https://fstop138.berrange.com :|

-- 
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/infra/tickets/issues/new