[Mageia-dev] Updates and 0 release

Wed Jul 27 22:52:00 CEST 2011

Le mercredi 27 juillet 2011 16:59:37, Samuel Verschelde a écrit :
+> Le mercredi 27 juillet 2011 12:52:04, Samuel Verschelde a écrit :
+> > Le mardi 26 juillet 2011 19:38:30, Samuel Verschelde a écrit :
+> > > Le mardi 26 juillet 2011 18:42:05, Michael Scherer a écrit :
+> > > [snip]
+> > > 
+> > > > Yet, the problem would also be there for regular non-version upgrade
+> > > > ( ie, if we have foo-2-2.mga2 in cauldron and stable, and that we
+> > > > need to rebuild on stable and not on cauldron, we face the same
+> > > > problem ), so using 0 is a incomplete solution to the issue, and the
+> > > > only solution is to rebuild in cauldron, and such problem should
+> > > > better be detected by youri.
+> > > 
+> > > Very good point, this is a decisive argument to me.
+> > > 
+> > > > So, the conclusion is that we should test ugprade rather than
+> > > > assuming that it will just work because we placed a 0 instead of a 1
+> > > > somewhere.
+> > > 
+> > > Ok for me provided we put in place the necessary processes to avoid
+> > > upgrade problems (Youri::Submit::Test::Precedence for example).
+> > > 
+> > > > Now, using 0 prevent us from having a simple way of seeing what
+> > > > prerelease we ship and that should be updated to latest stable ( as
+> > > > this seems to me quite desirable ).
+> > > 
+> > > Good point too.
+> > > 
+> > > > This is also inconsistent with the practice we had of backporting
+> > > > from cooker ( as the initial goal at Mandriva was to have 0
+> > > > modifications from cooker to backports to reduce the load ). And if
+> > > > we ship something in update and in backports, we would have the same
+> > > > packages with 2 different releases, and that doesn't seems a good
+> > > > idea.
+> > > 
+> > > Worse, the backport would be preferred to the update :/
+> > > 
+> > > You should have said all this right from the start rather than assuming
+> > > that we would have all these elements in mind :)
+> > > 
+> > > Samuel
+> > 
+> > I suggest we add this point to tonight's meeting topics and that a
+> > decision be taken then.
+> > 
+> > Then we would adapt the updates policy and the current packages in
+> > updates_testing if the 0 release in updates is abandoned. We must also
+> > decide if we continue to use subrels or not (using them could avoid
+> > unneeded rebuilds in cauldron when there are packaging bugs in updates).
+> > 
+> > Best regards
+> > 
+> > Samuel
+> 
+> Ok, there will be no meeting tonight, so let's decide it on the ML. Was
+> everyone convinced by misc's demonstration and do we agree to stop using
+> the 0 release for updates and activate the Youri::Submit::Test::Precedence
+> check on submit to prevent higher releases in mageia n than in mageia n+1
+> ?
+> 
+> And if yes do we use subrels for subsequent modifications of packages that
+> are proper to the mageia 1 branch ?
+> 
+> I vote yes for both questions.
+> 
+> Samuel
+
+Just to make things clear, contrarily as what was said in some of the previous 
+mails, I was told on IRC by misc and dmorgan that we should always use subrels 
+for updates.
+
+So this means that, when pushing foo-2-1.mga2 from cauldron to 1/updates, it 
+will become foo-2-1.1.mga1 and not foo-2-1.mga1
+
+It means also that you will have to bump the release in cauldron in order to 
+be allowed to submit the update, in that case. But as misc said, it should not 
+happen very often :
+- providing new versions as updates should remain an exception per updates 
+policy
+- if the package in cauldron already has a release > 1, no need to bump it
+
+Hope it's clear.
+
+Best regards
+
+Samuel Verschelde
+