Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-buildservice (261 mails)

[Martin Mohring <martin.mohring@xxxxxxxxx>]

Susanne Oberhauser wrote:
> Adrian Schröter <adrian@xxxxxxx> writes:
>
>   
> > Yes. This is not a big problem (except for storage), but the
> > question is we want to force the user manually to switch repos on
> > updates.
> >
> > I think in most cases a :Stable and a :Unstable makes more sense.
> >     
>
> Let me try to understand what that means.
>
> So I release some software, Bar-o-meter, 1.0.
>
> I've released and tested Bar-o-meter with some other project Foo-foo,
> Version 1.7, which is what's currently in Foo-foo:Stable.
>
> Now Foo-foo:Stable is updated to 2.0, which breaks APIs.  Now I have
> two bad choices:
>
>   * fix my package *right now* and hope nobody has used the broken
>     repos in-between, no matter what I've originally planned doing
>     now.
>
>   * copy the base packages in a version that works into my project to
>     be safe from such intrusive changes.
>
>
> If, however, the release is tagged with some api version, then I've
> pointed to Foo-foo:Release-1.7 or Foo-foo:Stable-1.7 and I'm safe.
>
> Or maybe Foo-foo:API-1.7?
>
> I'm bringing this up because we've had exactly this problem when rails
> was updated to 2.0 and that broke packages like our obs packages.
>   
If I remember correctly it was vice versa: from some point in time ruby
2.0 was needed, because ruby rails 2.0 features were use in OBS.
Still, there were rails 1.x and rails 2.x pkgs present. But: there is
some unhappyness with lots if copied/linked instead of "included" packs
like python, ruby, etc.

Martin

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx