| 1 |
On Sat, 09 Feb 2013 23:38:35 +1100 |
| 2 |
Michael Palimaka <kensington@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Hi, |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> On 9/02/2013 23:15, Alexis Ballier wrote: |
| 7 |
> > Dear fellow developers, |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > I hope this will be trivial to most of you but after seeing bug |
| 10 |
> > #455900 and the vast majority of developers not even thinking twice |
| 11 |
> > before sedding their dep strings, I believe this needs some |
| 12 |
> > attention. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> What is wrong with maintainers just updating their dependencies in |
| 15 |
> this fashion? Surely the onus in this case is on package maintainers |
| 16 |
> setting sensible subslots (which is indeed what you appear to be |
| 17 |
> saying below)? |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
If subslot does not represent ABI then it's wrong to set such := deps: |
| 20 |
By setting them you are forcing your users to needlessly rebuild your |
| 21 |
package. |
| 22 |
Think about glib: gobject-introspection needs to be rebuilt after each |
| 23 |
glib update. glib maintainers will likely want glib to have ${PV} as |
| 24 |
subslot and let gobject-introspection := depend on it. Packages that do |
| 25 |
not break with minor updates of glib (ie 99% of them) should not := |
| 26 |
depend on glib, even if it has a subslot. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
What I wanted to say could be summarized as: Please define what your |
| 29 |
subslot means when you define one and please check if that is the |
| 30 |
meaning you want to give it when you set := deps. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Alexis. |
Archives