Wrong published dates on charmhub.io

[Simon Déziel]

Original issue description: https://discourse.charmhub.io/t/wrong-published-dates-on-charmhub-io/11859, here's a retranscript sans-Markdown.

Looking at https://charmhub.io/lxd, we see multiple revisions as in the attached image.

It says that `latest/edge` rev `329` was published on May 6th however that is not right. That rev was published on July 11th, as visible on https://launchpad.net/~charm-lxd/charm-lxd/+charm/charm-lxd-edge

Downloading the charm package (`juju download --arch armhf --channel edge lxd`) and comparing the `src/charm.py` with what's in https://github.com/canonical/charm-lxd, confirms the publication date of July 11th.

[Guillermo Gonzalez (verterok)]

Hi,

Thanks for the detailed report.

I confirmed this issue by hitting the api.charmhub.io directly:

curl "https://api.charmhub.io/v2/charms/info/lxd?fields=channel-map.revision.revision,channel-map.revision.created-at"

{"channel-map":[{"channel":{"base":{"architecture":"amd64","channel":"20.04","name":"ubuntu"},"name":"stable","released-at":"2023-04-21T02:47:45.970220+00:00","risk":"stable","track":"latest"},"revision":{"created-at":"2023-04-21T02:37:11.824098+00:00","revision":290}},{"channel":{"base":{"architecture":"arm64","channel":"20.04","name":"ubuntu"},"name":"stable","released-at":"2023-04-21T02:48:14.362046+00:00","risk":"stable","track":"latest"},"revision":{"created-at":"2023-04-21T02:46:12.054276+00:00","revision":299}},{"channel":{"base":{"architecture":"armhf","channel":"20.04","name":"ubuntu"},"name":"stable","released-at":"2023-04-21T02:48:11.128340+00:00","risk":"stable","track":"latest"},"revision":{"created-at":"2023-04-21T02:46:11.117028+00:00","revision":298}},{"channel":{"base":{"architecture":"ppc64el","channel":"20.04","name":"ubuntu"},"name":"stable","released-at":"2023-04-21T02:47:59.184445+00:00","risk":"stable","track":"latest"},"revision":{"created-at":"2023-04-21T02:40:12.272628+00:00","revision":294}},{"channel":{"base":{"architecture":"s390x","channel":"20.04","name":"ubuntu"},"name":"stable","released-at":"2023-04-21T02:47:52.760759+00:00","risk":"stable","track":"latest"},"revision":{"created-at":"2023-04-21T02:40:11.201142+00:00","revision":292}},{"channel":{"base":{"architecture":"amd64","channel":"22.04","name":"ubuntu"},"name":"stable","released-at":"2023-04-21T02:47:49.596353+00:00","risk":"stable","track":"latest"},"revision":{"created-at":"2023-04-21T02:38:11.238744+00:00","revision":291}},{"channel":{"base":{"architecture":"arm64","channel":"22.04","name":"ubuntu"},"name":"stable","released-at":"2023-04-21T02:48:05.065869+00:00","risk":"stable","track":"latest"},"revision":{"created-at":"2023-04-21T02:40:13.619880+00:00","revision":296}},{"channel":{"base":{"architecture":"armhf","channel":"22.04","name":"ubuntu"},"name":"stable","released-at":"2023-04-21T02:48:02.250836+00:00","risk":"stable","track":"latest"},"revision":{"created-at":"2023-04-21T02:40:13.156564+00:00","revision":295}},{"channel":{"base":{"architecture":"ppc64el","channel":"22.04","name":"ubuntu"},"name":"stable","released-at":"2023-04-21T02:48:07.859176+00:00","risk":"stable","track":"latest"},"revision":{"created-at":"2023-04-21T02:41:11.975513+00:00","revision":297}},{"channel":{"base":{"architecture":"s390x","channel":"22.04","name":"ubuntu"},"name":"stable","released-at":"2023-04-21T02:47:55.770165+00:00","risk":"stable","track":"latest"},"revision":{"created-at":"2023-04-21T02:40:11.507366+00:00","revision":293}},{"channel":{"base":{"architecture":"amd64","channel":"20.04","name":"ubuntu"},"name":"edge","released-at":"2023-05-06T02:38:49.318420+00:00","risk":"edge","track":"latest"},"revision":{"created-at":"2023-05-06T02:38:33.596526+00:00","revision":321}},{"channel":{"base":{"architecture":"arm64","channel":"20.04","name":"ubuntu"},"name":"edge","released-at":"2023-05-06T02:40:26.448852+00:00","risk":"edge","track":"lat...

[Shane M. Pelletier (shanepelletier)]

Hi there,

I've begun investigating this issue and I believe that this is not actually a bug but a configuration issue with the charm (specifically, it seems to be missing a collaborator).

Looking at the build results page for the LXD charm (https://launchpad.net/~charm-lxd/charm-lxd/+charm/charm-lxd-edge/+build/9687), the message "Charmhub upload failed: No publisher or collaborator permission for the lxd charm package" is displayed. Also, the version of the charm that is downloaded using `juju download --arch armhf --channel edge lxd` is a version that was created on May 6, as seen by the following output:

shane@shane-Yoga:~/canonical/tmp/wrong-date/lxd_545a602$ ls -l
total 64
-rw-r--r-- 1 shane shane 1405 May 6 02:33 actions.yaml
-rw-r--r-- 1 shane shane 2890 May 6 02:33 config.yaml
-rwxr-xr-x 1 shane shane 102 May 6 02:34 dispatch
drwxrwxr-x 2 shane shane 4096 Sep 25 14:13 hooks
-rw-r--r-- 1 shane shane 6358 May 6 02:33 icon.svg
drwxrwxr-x 3 shane shane 4096 Sep 25 14:13 lib
-rw-r--r-- 1 shane shane 11358 May 6 02:33 LICENSE
-rw-r--r-- 1 shane shane 250 May 6 02:45 manifest.yaml
-rw-r--r-- 1 shane shane 1811 May 6 02:33 metadata.yaml
-rw-r--r-- 1 shane shane 4501 May 6 02:33 README.md
drwxrwxr-x 4 shane shane 4096 Sep 25 14:13 src
drwxrwxr-x 50 shane shane 4096 Sep 25 14:13 venv

and by comparing the contents of "README.md" with the current version on GitHub, where the newest contents remove references to linuxcontainers.org.

[Simon Déziel (sdeziel)]

@Shane, thanks for pointing my mistake in comparing the armhf/edge file!

@Tom would it be possible you need to re-authorize charmub uploads (https://launchpad.net/~charm-lxd/charm-lxd/+charm/charm-lxd-edge/+authorize)?

[Thomas Parrott (tomparrott)]

Thanks, I have done this now.

On Mon, 25 Sept 2023 at 20:11, Simon Déziel <email address hidden>
wrote:

> @Shane, thanks for pointing my mistake in comparing the armhf/edge file!
>
> @Tom would it be possible you need to re-authorize charmub uploads
> (https://launchpad.net/~charm-lxd/charm-lxd/+charm/charm-lxd-
> edge/+authorize)?
>
> --
> You received this bug notification because you are subscribed to the bug
> report.
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2036282
>
> Title:
> Wrong published dates on charmhub.io
>
> Status in Snap Store Server:
> Confirmed
>
> Bug description:
> Original issue description: https://discourse.charmhub.io/t/wrong-
> published-dates-on-charmhub-io/11859, here's a retranscript sans-
> Markdown.
>
> Looking at https://charmhub.io/lxd, we see multiple revisions as in
> the attached image.
>
> It says that `latest/edge` rev `329` was published on May 6th however
> that is not right. That rev was published on July 11th, as visible on
> https://launchpad.net/~charm-lxd/charm-lxd/+charm/charm-lxd-edge
>
> Downloading the charm package (`juju download --arch armhf --channel
> edge lxd`) and comparing the `src/charm.py` with what's in
> https://github.com/canonical/charm-lxd, confirms the publication date
> of July 11th.
>
> To manage notifications about this bug go to:
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/snapstore-server/+bug/2036282/+subscriptions
>
>

[Simon Déziel (sdeziel)]

Thanks Tom and Shane (again). I can confirm the proper date is now visible in https://charmhub.io/lxd so closing.