Tue, 13 Nov 2007
The bodhi-client package should be making its way to an updates-testing repository near you! Not only does this command-line tool give developers easier access to bodhi, but also provides some new features to help people get more involved with testing updates and providing useful feedback.
I wrote up some documentation on various usage examples of the tool, which can be found on the bodhi wiki. I also submitted a Makefile.common patch that, once applied, will allow you to run `make update` from your package branch. This will drop you into a new update template, and will then submit your update straight to bodhi.
Some noteworthy features in the bodhi-client, aside from the normal bodhi functionality:
- Ability to view all updates-testing packages that you currently have
installed on your local machine, that you *could* be testing and providing
useful feedback for
- bodhi --testable
- Ability to view your update candidates (this is a fairly expensive
operation -- please use sparingly):
- bodhi --candidates
I also upgraded our production bodhi instance yesterday, which pulled in a ton of bugfixes and some new features, such as:
- Updates by default will now get submitted to into testing. This can easily be modified when using the web form, the bodhi client, and `make update`.
- Thanks to the new security bug tracking policy, we're now tracking CVEs using Bugzilla, thus bodhi no longer will ask you for CVE IDs. The less information that the developer has to type, the better. Read the policy for more details. Bodhi is not yet 100% compliant to the proposed changes, as it does not know about parent/tracking bugs, but should be soon.
- If you try and submit an update that is older than something already pending/testing, you will be prompted with a dialog that will give you the ability to instantly obsolete those updates.
As always, patches/questions/criticisms/comments are welcome. You can file tickets in the usual place. Happy hacking!
Posted by Roby at Thu Apr 14 22:01:18 2011
TYVM you've solved all my prbomels
Posted by Sudeep at Mon Dec 8 16:21:47 2014
I find the objection to the word Battleship (owned by Hasbro) hard to acepct. Not only is Battleship such a common word by was and is used in other games titles and descriptions, computer or other wise. Battleship is also used as generic word for this type of games. I used to play with pen and paper 20 years ago. You can take fear of trademark infringement a bit too far. Please take this opinion to the mailing list!As for new names Please, for all that's sacred, do not choose either Knames or stupid names as a way protesting against this. Just look at what Fedora chose. Ridiculous!First you should look at type of game it is. Then you should choose a thematic consistency with the other games in the KDE collection, but without using the letter K!Just a food for thought a simplistic example: Konqi's Naval Battle and Konqi's Snakes.Using the KDE's mascot as common theme. You could then generic names that reflect the games types but without looking too generic Or you could be a little less anglo-centric and used Batalha Naval used in the Portuguese and Spanish speaking countries.