EPICS Controls Argonne National Laboratory

Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System

1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  <20192020  2021  2022  2023  2024  Index 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  <20192020  2021  2022  2023  2024 
<== Date ==> <== Thread ==>

Subject: Re: New sequencer release 2.2.8
From: "J. Lewis Muir via Tech-talk" <[email protected]>
To: Mark Rivers <[email protected]>
Cc: tech-talk <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2019 17:14:00 -0600
On 12/11, Mark Rivers wrote:
> 
> > Yes, that's because the "known problems" page concept is weird, IMO.
> 
> > EPICS does it too, and I've complained about that previously.
> 
> > People expect that if you know about a problem, you will fix it and make a new patch release.
> 
> 
> Hmm, other minor developers like Redhat seem to do the same thing.
> 
> 
> https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterprise_linux/7/html/7.7_release_notes/known_issues

(Resending because the first copy of the above message I received did
not have Tech-Talk CC'd, so I did not reply with Tech-Talk CC'd.)

Hmm, I was unaware of such a document from Red Hat.  Thank you for
pointing that out!  I stand corrected.

Well, partially corrected. :-)  After a quick scan through the first
seven or so issues on that page, it seems like the things listed there
fall into one of three categories:

1. Red Hat won't fix.
2. Red Hat has fixed and released an update to a package to fix it.
3. Red Hat does not have a fix and is working on it.

I can see using a known-problems document for #1 and #3, but not for #2.
For example, in the #2 case of BZ#1631826, the bug status is "CLOSED
ERRATA" with a "Fixed In Version" field value of ipa-4.6.5-2.el7.  So,
Red Hat has released an updated package that fixes the problem.  They're
not sitting on a fix that they know fixes the problem, but not releasing
it.

That's the part I'm not too excited about with the known-problems page
concept for EPICS and related software: at least for EPICS, it seems to
just be a list of patches that fix problems.  Then I think to myself,
why don't they just make a patch release that includes the fix that they
already have?  Why do I have to download the tarball, and then manually
read the known-problems page, download all the patches that are linked
there, and apply them?  Why not just make a patch release so that I can
just download the latest patch release and know that I've got the latest
version?

Lewis

References:
New sequencer release 2.2.8 Benjamin Franksen via Tech-talk
Re: New sequencer release 2.2.8 J. Lewis Muir via Tech-talk
Re: New sequencer release 2.2.8 Mark Rivers via Tech-talk

Navigate by Date:
Prev: Re: New sequencer release 2.2.8 Michael Davidsaver via Tech-talk
Next: Re: New sequencer release 2.2.8 Ben Franksen via Tech-talk
Index: 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  <20192020  2021  2022  2023  2024 
Navigate by Thread:
Prev: Re: New sequencer release 2.2.8 Michael Davidsaver via Tech-talk
Next: Re: New sequencer release 2.2.8 Johnson, Andrew N. via Tech-talk
Index: 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  <20192020  2021  2022  2023  2024 
ANJ, 12 Dec 2019 Valid HTML 4.01! · Home · News · About · Base · Modules · Extensions · Distributions · Download ·
· Search · EPICS V4 · IRMIS · Talk · Bugs · Documents · Links · Licensing ·