| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA256 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On 24/01/13 11:39 AM, Zac Medico wrote: |
| 5 |
> On 01/24/2013 07:15 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: |
| 6 |
>> In general, I would recommend for any library maintainers, to |
| 7 |
>> either file bugs against the rdeps of a package or directly |
| 8 |
>> update the rdeps (with permission, of course) when implementing |
| 9 |
>> sub-slots. Of course, I believe the rdeps of a library can add |
| 10 |
>> slot operators to their *DEPEND atoms even if the library doesn't |
| 11 |
>> have a sub-slot (yet); this would be useful anyways, as a new |
| 12 |
>> sub-slot in the lib will automatically trigger appropriate |
| 13 |
>> rebuilding. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Yes, that's a good idea. However, it means that the introduction of |
| 16 |
> the first sub-slot will trigger a rebuild of the dependent package. |
| 17 |
> So, it's a good idea to introduce the first sub-slot during a |
| 18 |
> version bump where something has changed that justifies a sub-slot |
| 19 |
> bump. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
That seems to be what dev's are doing anyways, though. |
| 22 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 23 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
iF4EAREIAAYFAlEBaK4ACgkQ2ugaI38ACPAAfgD+Ja3RKlfv1uWn7e3/V2rnGNQQ |
| 26 |
YY2NHIgQLQxp/Dx66hcA/iPoA7tF6cME8MtqmOumIEVrDzQpE8LEARPmCeQOlqwd |
| 27 |
=HzQM |
| 28 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives