[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Package EVR problems in Fedora 2007-10-31

On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 12:56 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 11:41:36 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > > Why isn't the same update built also for F8?
> > > Why do you want to limit the testing to one dist?
> >
> > E.g. to evaluate for distro specific issues? Remember, that though a
> > particular spec might be identical for different distros, it's
> > infrastructure underneath might be different.
> You didn't answer the questions, especially not because an "identical
> spec" does not break any upgrade path. Differences in the build deps
> don't either. And changes under the hood can be done with an increase
> of the least-significant portion of the EVR, that is to the right of
> %{?dist}, for instance. You don't bump V without properly evaluating a
> version upgrade, first.
C'mon, you are once more trying to push people to adopt your (IMO:
broken) vision.

IMO, testing should not be off any relevance EVR wise, except for 2

- If a package is being pushed from testing to updates (currenly not
possible due to bodhi's design), the EVR must comply to the EVR in
"dist" and "dist+1"

- The EVR  of a package in testing must be greater than "dist".

Anything else is overengineering.

> So, let me rephrase the questions:
> Why is an update prepared and built for an older dist, which breaks
> [read: will break] the upgrade path, without starting this
> experimental activity in the latest dist?
E.g. for what I said above.

Example: "Package X works in FC-8 but doesn't work in FC-7".

=> People start addressing the FC-7 issue by building packages for FC-7
and want their FC-7 audience to test their attempts. FC-8 is completely
irrelevant at this point.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]