Responsibility for rebuilding dependent components, was: F-16 Branched report: 20110920 changes
 

On Tue, 2011-09-20 at 13:53 +0200, Johannes Lips wrote:
> What's wrong with all that broken deps? Is this just a missing rebuild
> against opencv and other libs or what's the reason for all this
> "mess". I mean the release of F16 is not that far away and the amount
> of broken deps is quite big imho.
> I would be glad helping out if this is due to some orphaned packages.

Some of these seem to be a case of "new library version was built and
pushed as an update without the rebuilds of dependent components". It
seems to be unclear who is responsible for the dependents to be rebuilt
and included in the same update as the library being updated. Currently
I only see mails of maintainers who plan updating the library, but the
rest of it pretty much depends on the maintainers of the depending
components rebuilding them quickly enough, and the original maintainer
to include them in the F-16 branched update.

I'd like to see a discussion about how we can ensure -- within
reasonable limits -- that e.g. bumping a library's SONAME is followed by
dependent components being rebuilt and included with the providing
component in one update.

Nils
--
Nils Philippsen "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase
Red Hat a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty
nils@redhat.com nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759
PGP fingerprint: C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F 656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Responsibility for rebuilding dependent components, was: F-16 Branched report: 20110920 changes
 

On 09/20/2011 03:01 PM, Nils Philippsen wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-09-20 at 13:53 +0200, Johannes Lips wrote:
>> What's wrong with all that broken deps? Is this just a missing rebuild
>> against opencv and other libs or what's the reason for all this
>> "mess". I mean the release of F16 is not that far away and the amount
>> of broken deps is quite big imho.
>> I would be glad helping out if this is due to some orphaned packages.
>
> Some of these seem to be a case of "new library version was built and
> pushed as an update without the rebuilds of dependent components". It
> seems to be unclear who is responsible for the dependents to be rebuilt
> and included in the same update as the library being updated.

When you have a closer look, you'll notice that such "mass rebuilts"
were being delayed by QA's "delay queue" and now are stuck.

> Currently
> I only see mails of maintainers who plan updating the library, but the
> rest of it pretty much depends on the maintainers of the depending
> components rebuilding them quickly enough, and the original maintainer
> to include them in the F-16 branched update.
>
> I'd like to see a discussion about how we can ensure -- within
> reasonable limits -- that e.g. bumping a library's SONAME is followed by
> dependent components being rebuilt and included with the providing
> component in one update.

I'd like to see a discussion on the proceedures currently being applied
by QA, esp. "during freezes". IMO, they are unsuitable and harmful.

Ralf

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel