[gentoo-dev] Improving warnings on packages.g.o

[gentoo-dev] Improving warnings on packages.g.o

[Max Magorsch]

Hi all,

Good news regarding packages.g.o!

While the new packages.g.o version went into production some time ago,
this also led to some false warnings about outdated package versions.
This is because we currently take information about outdated package
versions from repology.org, which are not always accurate.

To avoid these false warnings it's now possible to filter the repology
checks. To do so, there is a new git repository called
soko-metadata[0]. The repository contains a folder called repology,
which in turn contains three files:

1) ignored-repositories: You can add repositories that should be
globally ignored for the repology checks for *all* packages. E.g.
Windows only repositories as appget might be disabled globally here.

2) ignored-categories: You can disable the repology check for whole
categories here. The check will be disabled for all packages in this
category.

3) ignored-packages: You can either disable the repology check for a
single package here (e.g. sys-auth/pambase), or disable a repository
for the repology check for a single package here using atom::repo
(e.g.: net-misc/dropbox::void_x86_64). The later option is especially
useful if another distribution creates a non-standard version for a
single package and all versions of other distributions are marked as
outdated because of this (as in the case of dropbox and void linux).

The soko-metadata repository is writable by all devs, so that all
package maintainers are welcome to contribute to reduce the number of
false warnings.

-M

[0] https://gitweb.gentoo.org/sites/soko-metadata.git/

Re: [gentoo-dev] Improving warnings on packages.g.o

[Nils Freydank]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 751 bytes --]

Hi,

thanks for the work around p.g.o! I'd directly like to use your opt out for a
package I maintain in proxied mode:

The following changes since commit b1e0b4c9ec76049631cbb0a2d3798adbce2075ac:

  Ignore net-misc/dropbox::void_x86_64 for repology (2020-08-26 19:14:45 +0200)

are available in the Git repository at:

  https://git.holgersson.xyz/gentoo-related/soko-metadata ignore-mktorrent

for you to fetch changes up to dd823eaaf3f4893b24130360c7ec1c7f22f8b39b:

  Ignore net-p2p/mktorrent for repology (2020-08-27 11:45:34 +0200)

----------------------------------------------------------------
Nils Freydank (1):
      Ignore net-p2p/mktorrent for repology

 repology/ignored-packages | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

--
regards,
Nils

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 963 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Improving warnings on packages.g.o

[Max Magorsch]

On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 12:00 PM Nils Freydank <holgersson@posteo.de> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> thanks for the work around p.g.o! I'd directly like to use your opt out for a
> package I maintain in proxied mode:
>
> The following changes since commit b1e0b4c9ec76049631cbb0a2d3798adbce2075ac:
>
>   Ignore net-misc/dropbox::void_x86_64 for repology (2020-08-26 19:14:45 +0200)
>
> are available in the Git repository at:
>
>   https://git.holgersson.xyz/gentoo-related/soko-metadata ignore-mktorrent
>
> for you to fetch changes up to dd823eaaf3f4893b24130360c7ec1c7f22f8b39b:
>
>   Ignore net-p2p/mktorrent for repology (2020-08-27 11:45:34 +0200)
>

Great, thank you!

I've just added net-p2p/mktorrent to the ignore list and the warning
should have gone on packages.g.o now.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Improving warnings on packages.g.o

[Alexis Ballier]

On Wed, 2020-08-26 at 18:57 +0000, Max Magorsch wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Good news regarding packages.g.o!
> 
> While the new packages.g.o version went into production some time
> ago,
> this also led to some false warnings about outdated package versions.
> This is because we currently take information about outdated package
> versions from repology.org, which are not always accurate.
> 


Any plans on using the remoteid from metadata.xml ?
It's likely to be much more accurate since people have been filling
those manually for some time now ;)

Alexis

Re: [gentoo-dev] Improving warnings on packages.g.o

[Max Magorsch]

On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 12:10 PM Alexis Ballier <aballier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Any plans on using the remoteid from metadata.xml ?
> It's likely to be much more accurate since people have been filling
> those manually for some time now ;)
>

I think we could use the remoteid in future to improve the repology
warnings. However, I am not fully convinced that we can completely
replace the repology check using the remoteid, as a simple grep shows,
that currently 9873 packages contain at least one remote id. That's
just half of our packages in the tree. So I could imagine that we do
use the remoteid whenever it is available and otherwise fall back on
the repology data. However, for this to work we would need to things
imo:

1) Get the latest version available given the remoteid
2) Compare the latest version available with our latest version

It's especially the second part that I think is not done that quickly.
However, if anyone is interested in coming up with some logic / code
for this, any contributions are highly welcome.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Improving warnings on packages.g.o

[Louis Sautier]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1427 bytes --]

On 27/08/2020 12:37, Max Magorsch wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 12:10 PM Alexis Ballier <aballier@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> Any plans on using the remoteid from metadata.xml ?
>> It's likely to be much more accurate since people have been filling
>> those manually for some time now ;)
>>
> 
> I think we could use the remoteid in future to improve the repology
> warnings. However, I am not fully convinced that we can completely
> replace the repology check using the remoteid, as a simple grep shows,
> that currently 9873 packages contain at least one remote id. That's
> just half of our packages in the tree. So I could imagine that we do
> use the remoteid whenever it is available and otherwise fall back on
> the repology data. However, for this to work we would need to things
> imo:
> 
> 1) Get the latest version available given the remoteid
> 2) Compare the latest version available with our latest version
> 
> It's especially the second part that I think is not done that quickly.
> However, if anyone is interested in coming up with some logic / code
> for this, any contributions are highly welcome.
> 
Another cool addition, thanks :)

While we're on the topic of remoteid, could you please add links for
those somewhere in the package page?
I opened a bug for this a long time ago and I think it would be a nice
addition to the HOMEPAGE URL:

https://bugs.gentoo.org/657018



[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Improving warnings on packages.g.o

[Marek Szuba]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 651 bytes --]

On 2020-08-26 20:57, Max Magorsch wrote:

> To avoid these false warnings it's now possible to filter the repology
> checks.

No more false warnings due to Repology not understanding the Gentoo Perl
version scheme? Yes please! Thank you *very* much for this feature, and
in case I haven't said it yet for all your work on packages.g.o in the
first place.

On a related note, how hard would it in your opinion be to implement the
handling of said Perl versioning scheme? In this particular case
querying remote-IDs instead of / addition to Repology will not help
because it's the difference between Gentoo and upstream.

-- 
Marecki


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]