[Bug 58510] New: Submitting new test results lists all versions of Wine
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 Bug ID: 58510 Summary: Submitting new test results lists all versions of Wine Product: WineHQ Apps Database Version: unspecified Hardware: x86-64 URL: https://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php OS: Linux Status: NEW Keywords: download, regression, source Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: appdb-unknown Assignee: wine-bugs(a)winehq.org Reporter: imwellcushtymelike(a)gmail.com Regression SHA1: a0e96bdcdbb5f3b950574685d9d9a66c9e9985a9 Distribution: --- Created attachment 78978 --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=78978 HTML A recent change has made submitting a new test result list all versions of Wine, whereas before it was only the last few and the stable release. I'm guessing a0e96bdcdbb5f3b950574685d9d9a66c9e9985a9 may be the commit in question. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 Stian Low <wineryyyyy(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |wineryyyyy(a)gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Stian Low <wineryyyyy(a)gmail.com> --- This bug was indeed spawned by: https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58473 Test results are not displayed for applications https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=56706 AppDB does not properly separate the Bugzilla DB AppDB previously had a separate versions table from Bugzilla and part of the effort to separate them was to have AppDB use the Bugzilla versions list available via HTML at https://bugs.winehq.org/query.cgi?format=advanced. If the versions should not be synced then that may be justification for adding the versions DB table back to AppDB. If the list from Bugzilla is in proper order then it can be limited to only the latest range to narrow the list. Otherwise it may be further justification for just adding the DB table back and storing the versions separately. I'll take a look at the bugzilla repo to see if there's a way to grab a filtered list of versions as another possible solution to narrow the list. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 --- Comment #2 from Stian Low <wineryyyyy(a)gmail.com> --- The reasoning behind this change was that the same wine versions when creating a new bug report should be the same list when creating new app version test results. https://bugs.winehq.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Wine Is there a flaw in that reasoning? Does it matter if all versions are listed? If the list is ordered from latest to oldest is that a sufficient fix so that you don't have to scroll all the way to the bottom? That was missing from the submitted solution. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 --- Comment #3 from Ken Sharp <imwellcushtymelike(a)gmail.com> ---
Does it matter if all versions are listed?
I don't really know. If you look at the message next to the box: “Version not listed? Your Wine is too old, upgrade!” Someone wants users to upgrade Wine. Perhaps test results for old versions of Wine are not very useful. Bug reports for old versions of Wine certainly aren't, but you can't hide old versions on Bugzilla because of old bug reports. If users never upgrade then we could have 1,000 results for the same version of Wine, and I doubt that is very useful. I guess it's a policy decision. How were the versions populated originally? -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 --- Comment #4 from Stian Low <wineryyyyy(a)gmail.com> --- (In reply to Ken Sharp from comment #3)
How were the versions populated originally?
via winehq_appdb_stianlow/tables/bugzilla_tables.sql which was removed during the DB separation merge: -- WineHQ Bugzilla for AppDB Development /* * versions information */ CREATE TABLE `versions` ( `value` varchar(64) NOT NULL default '', `product_id` smallint(6) NOT NULL default '0', `id` mediumint(9) NOT NULL auto_increment, PRIMARY KEY (`id`), UNIQUE KEY `versions_product_id_idx` (`product_id`,`value`) ) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8 PACK_KEYS=1; -- -- Dumping data for table `versions` -- INSERT INTO `versions` VALUES ('unspecified',1,1); INSERT INTO `versions` VALUES ('CVS',1,2); INSERT INTO `versions` VALUES ('unspecified',2,3); INSERT INTO `versions` VALUES ('unspecified',3,4); INSERT INTO `versions` VALUES ('unspecified',4,5); INSERT INTO `versions` VALUES ('20010305',1,6); INSERT INTO `versions` VALUES ('20010216',1,7); INSERT INTO `versions` VALUES ('20010112',1,8); INSERT INTO `versions` VALUES ('20010326',1,9); -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 --- Comment #5 from Ken Sharp <imwellcushtymelike(a)gmail.com> --- Created attachment 78991 --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=78991 It's already started! -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 --- Comment #6 from Stian Low <wineryyyyy(a)gmail.com> --- (In reply to Ken Sharp from comment #5)
Created attachment 78991 [details] It's already started!
See pending merge request that attempts a quick fix: https://gitlab.winehq.org/winehq/appdb/-/merge_requests/28 -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 --- Comment #7 from Stian Low <wineryyyyy(a)gmail.com> --- This bug may be closed. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 --- Comment #8 from Rosanne DiMesio <dimesio(a)earthlink.net> --- (In reply to Stian Low from comment #7)
This bug may be closed.
This was not completely fixed. The dropdown list now starts with "unspecified" and "main", neither of which are valid versions. It also lists all the 10.0-rc* versions at the bottom of the list, but does not include 10.0, which is newer. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 --- Comment #9 from Stian Low <wineryyyyy@gmail.com> --- (In reply to Rosanne DiMesio from comment #8)
This was not completely fixed. The dropdown list now starts with "unspecified" and "main", neither of which are valid versions. It also lists all the 10.0-rc* versions at the bottom of the list, but does not include 10.0, which is newer.
Apologies for missing this. The list is based entirely on order of Bugzilla versions list which also has 10.0 before 10.0-rc1: https://bugs.winehq.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Wine I assumed AppDB matching Bugzilla valid. Is that an incorrect? Version "main" seems to have been removed from Bugzilla since reported but "unspecified" still exists. Removing "unspecified" is simple but others like it may appear again depending on whoever maintains Bugzilla versions. Fixing order of versions may be better handled by Bugzilla to be propagated to AppDB. Otherwise a custom sort would need to be added for AppDB which may effectively add back the versions DB removed. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 --- Comment #10 from Stian Low <wineryyyyy@gmail.com> --- (In reply to Stian Low from comment #9)
Version "main" seems to have been removed from Bugzilla since reported but "unspecified" still exists.
Correction: version "main" still appears for Bugzilla list that provides AppDB version list: - https://bugs.winehq.org/query.cgi?format=advanced Versions "main" and "unspecified" appear as latest because of Bugzilla sort order: id="v1057_version" -> 11.0 id="v1047_version" -> 11.0-rc1 id="v1049_version" -> 11.0-rc2 id="v1051_version" -> 11.0-rc3 id="v1053_version" -> 11.0-rc4 id="v1086_version" -> 11.13 id="v1088_version" -> 11.14 id="v952_version" -> main id="v375_version" -> unspecified Changing Bugzilla version sort order based on id vs name would auto fix the -rc release candidates disordered but "main" and "unspecified" may need to be renamed prefixed with 0 in order not to appear at end of list along with latest versions: v952 -> v0952 v375 -> v0375 I'll pull wine Bugzilla repo to push a fix: - https://gitlab.winehq.org/winehq/bugzilla -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 --- Comment #11 from Stian Low <wineryyyyy@gmail.com> --- (In reply to Stian Low from comment #10)
v952 -> v0952 v375 -> v0375
Renames seems unnecessary. Rather reordering versions by id seems to be the simple fix for AppDB which seems also unproblematic for Bugzilla. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 --- Comment #12 from Alexandre Julliard <julliard@winehq.org> --- That list contains all versions for all packages, which is not what we want for the AppDB, it should be querying versions only for the Wine package. There's a new REST API that can be used for this. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 --- Comment #13 from Stian Low <wineryyyyy@gmail.com> --- (In reply to Alexandre Julliard from comment #12)
That list contains all versions for all packages, which is not what we want for the AppDB, it should be querying versions only for the Wine package. There's a new REST API that can be used for this.
Thanks @julliard. REST would have been used if available at the time so it will be switched now: - https://gitlab.winehq.org/winehq/appdb/-/merge_requests/13#note_109017 Default REST URL for Wine still orders 11.0-rc after 11.0 and "main" is fixed but "unspecifed" still appears at the end. Checking if REST URL supports changing sort without needing to mod Bugzilla: - https://bugs.winehq.org/rest/product/Wine { "id" : 1057, "is_active" : true, "name" : "11.0", "sort_key" : 0 }, { "id" : 1047, "is_active" : true, "name" : "11.0-rc1", "sort_key" : 0 }, { "id" : 1049, "is_active" : true, "name" : "11.0-rc2", "sort_key" : 0 }, { "id" : 1051, "is_active" : true, "name" : "11.0-rc3", "sort_key" : 0 }, { "id" : 1053, "is_active" : true, "name" : "11.0-rc4", "sort_key" : 0 }, { "id" : 1055, "is_active" : true, "name" : "11.0-rc5", "sort_key" : 0 }, { "id" : 1059, "is_active" : true, "name" : "11.1", "sort_key" : 0 }, { "id" : 1061, "is_active" : true, "name" : "11.2", "sort_key" : 0 }, { "id" : 1064, "is_active" : true, "name" : "11.3", "sort_key" : 0 }, { "id" : 1066, "is_active" : true, "name" : "11.4", "sort_key" : 0 }, { "id" : 1068, "is_active" : true, "name" : "11.5", "sort_key" : 0 }, { "id" : 1070, "is_active" : true, "name" : "11.6", "sort_key" : 0 }, { "id" : 1072, "is_active" : true, "name" : "11.7", "sort_key" : 0 }, { "id" : 1074, "is_active" : true, "name" : "11.8", "sort_key" : 0 }, { "id" : 1076, "is_active" : true, "name" : "11.9", "sort_key" : 0 }, { "id" : 1079, "is_active" : true, "name" : "11.10", "sort_key" : 0 }, { "id" : 1081, "is_active" : true, "name" : "11.11", "sort_key" : 0 }, { "id" : 1083, "is_active" : true, "name" : "11.12", "sort_key" : 0 }, { "id" : 1086, "is_active" : true, "name" : "11.13", "sort_key" : 0 }, { "id" : 1088, "is_active" : true, "name" : "11.14", "sort_key" : 0 }, { "id" : 1, "is_active" : true, "name" : "unspecified", "sort_key" : 0 } -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 --- Comment #14 from Stian Low <wineryyyyy@gmail.com> --- (In reply to Stian Low from comment #13)
{ "id" : 1, "is_active" : true, "name" : "unspecified", "sort_key" : 0 }
Would make sense for "sort_key" to be used as primary ORDER BY field for query but all are set to 0 but may be a workaround if REST API does not support reordering version sort otherwise. Only latest 20 may need to be updated per current AppDB impl. Updating all versions manually would probably be tedious. If more than latest 20 require sort_order changed then a script may be more convenient which I'll write. I lack Bugzilla privileges to test immediately so will test locally once Perl deps are satisfied. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 --- Comment #15 from Alexandre Julliard <julliard@winehq.org> --- I think the current sort order is fine, but if you want a different order for the AppDB that should be done there, not by hacking Bugzilla. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 --- Comment #16 from Stian Low <wineryyyyy@gmail.com> --- (In reply to Alexandre Julliard from comment #15)
I think the current sort order is fine, but if you want a different order for the AppDB that should be done there, not by hacking Bugzilla.
I also thought Bugzilla wine versions sort was good enough for reuse for AppDB but release candidates like 11.0-rc1 appearing before official release 11.0 does seem incorrect for AppDB because the list is limited to 25 latest versions per Ken Sharp's request: - https://gitlab.winehq.org/winehq/appdb/-/merge_requests/28#note_110361 If AppDB listed all versions as done originally before Ken's request to limit to only last 25 then it would probably be less problematic like for Bugzilla because 11.0 could still be selected instead of cutoff before 11.0-rc1. I'll leave Bugzilla hacking off the table as a solution. REST API seems to lack support for changing product versions sort. Therefore if "sort_key" controls the REST API sort then it seems to be the only other solution not involving Bugzilla hacks. If a Bugzilla admin can test by changing sort_key for version 11.14 or earlier from 0 to 1 to see if it gets updated to the end of the list then it would confirm it as a potentially valid solution. If so, then updating the last 25 versions should satisfy AppDB by fixing the release candidates order and "unspecified" from appearing at the end. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 --- Comment #17 from Alexandre Julliard <julliard@winehq.org> --- I don't see any way to change the sort key from the admin interface. If you want to limit it to recent versions you can sort the list by id. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 --- Comment #18 from Stian Low <wineryyyyy@gmail.com> --- (In reply to Alexandre Julliard from comment #17)
I don't see any way to change the sort key from the admin interface.
If you want to limit it to recent versions you can sort the list by id.
Thanks for checking. ID will be used for correcting sort for AppDB instead of sort_key. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 --- Comment #19 from Stian Low <wineryyyyy@gmail.com> --- Created attachment 81590 --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=81590 Screenshot MR-31 fixing wine versions sort order for AppDB Browse Apps based on Bugzilla ID https://gitlab.winehq.org/winehq/appdb/-/merge_requests/31 Bugzilla admins should be made aware that AppDB is dependent on ID of wine versions which should be handled with care in that regard. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 --- Comment #20 from Stian Low <wineryyyyy@gmail.com> --- Created attachment 81600 --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=81600 Screenshot MR-31 merged fixing wine versions sort order for appdb.winehq.org (In reply to Stian Low from comment #19)
Please let me know if there are any other issues. Otherwise this bug may be fixed. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 --- Comment #21 from Ken Sharp <imwellcushtymelike@gmail.com> --- This still lists all versions back to 0.9 and "unspecified" which should not be used on the AppDB (probably should not be used on Bugzilla but bugs exist that use it). Before the demerge there was around five of the latest releases plus the current stable release. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 --- Comment #22 from Stian Low <wineryyyyy@gmail.com> --- Created attachment 81618 --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=81618 Screenshot wine versions limited to top 25 again for localhost (regress from prev 870d1c5) (In reply to Ken Sharp from comment #21)
This still lists all versions back to 0.9 and "unspecified" which should not be used on the AppDB (probably should not be used on Bugzilla but bugs exist that use it).
Before the demerge there was around five of the latest releases plus the current stable release.
Thanks for catching. Sorry for missing. MR-37 pending hopefully finally fixes remaining. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 --- Comment #23 from Stian Low <wineryyyyy@gmail.com> --- (In reply to Stian Low from comment #22)
MR-37 pending hopefully finally fixes remaining.
https://gitlab.winehq.org/winehq/appdb/-/merge_requests/37 -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 --- Comment #24 from Ken Sharp <imwellcushtymelike@gmail.com> --- When Alexandre releases a new Wine version, the AppDB used to update with the latest version (as it still does), and the latest stable version. I assume this was somehow marked in the database as a stable version. I don't know how the release script did this, however. Does Bugzilla have a field for flagging a stable branch release? -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 --- Comment #25 from Ken Sharp <imwellcushtymelike@gmail.com> --- Or maybe not? https://gitlab.winehq.org/imwellcushtymelike/appdb/-/commit/c2b0b708d90d26d6... -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 --- Comment #26 from Stian Low <wineryyyyy@gmail.com> --- (In reply to Ken Sharp from comment #25)
Or maybe not? https://gitlab.winehq.org/imwellcushtymelike/appdb/-/commit/ c2b0b708d90d26d686213eb64e6575d02513e6f8
If commit c2b0b708d9 was the latest Bugzilla SQL query prior to my changes that split Bugzilla from AppDB then ORDER BY (versions) id DESC matches the equivalent that is now done instead via `krsort` which reverses the order of ids returned by Bugzilla REST API call from AppDB: https://gitlab.winehq.org/winehq/appdb/-/commit/870d1c51ed3f2183f556be611927... Buzilla version id is probably handled via DB auto_increment so @julliard adding a new version to Bugzilla will put it at the top of the reversed id list which will be updated for AppDB once the update timer expires per whatever @jnewman sets. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 --- Comment #27 from Stian Low <wineryyyyy@gmail.com> --- (In reply to Stian Low from comment #23)
(In reply to Stian Low from comment #22)
MR-37 pending hopefully finally fixes remaining.
Merged and update timer already pulled latest which looks correct now: - https://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=application&sTitle=Browse%... -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 Ken Sharp <imwellcushtymelike@gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW |RESOLVED Fixed by SHA1| |98ecb9307de57f622d2cc332c91 | |d875b52570c26 --- Comment #28 from Ken Sharp <imwellcushtymelike@gmail.com> --- Lovely! So much nicer! Thank you for fixing. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58510 Ken Sharp <imwellcushtymelike@gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |CLOSED --- Comment #29 from Ken Sharp <imwellcushtymelike@gmail.com> --- Closing bugs marked as fixed. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
participants (2)
-
WineHQ Bugzilla -
WineHQ Bugzilla