On Monday 16 June 2008 12:29:06 Susanne Oberhauser wrote:
Adrian Schröter
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.
* build old and new ones in Stable project. Since the api breaks, you would anyway need to be able to install the old version beside the new one.
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.
When you add numbers, you enforce all users and packagers to switch manually. -- Adrian Schroeter SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) email: adrian@suse.de --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org