From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D99E5138247 for ; Wed, 6 Nov 2013 18:53:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3C2B4E09DB; Wed, 6 Nov 2013 18:53:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3FE49E086D for ; Wed, 6 Nov 2013 18:53:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (ip-213-220-199-78.net.upcbroadband.cz [213.220.199.78]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: yac) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 30CDB33EE6C for ; Wed, 6 Nov 2013 18:53:45 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2013 19:53:02 +0100 From: yac To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy-level discussion for minimum versions on dependencies Message-ID: <20131106195302.0b05c9c4@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: References: <527A5D22.10009@gentoo.org> <1383752934.23332.4.camel@localhost> <20131106185611.01c6f6ac@gentoo.org> <527A84A3.7070607@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.0 (GTK+ 2.24.17; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA512; boundary="Sig_/1d0KKkcTs9K+0PfU47KInbo"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: f47f1318-3f26-4bf1-9eb9-18b54838a1dc X-Archives-Hash: 58daec4b678824745108111dddb74ab1 --Sig_/1d0KKkcTs9K+0PfU47KInbo Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 6 Nov 2013 13:22:13 -0500 Mike Gilbert wrote: > On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Ian Stakenvicius > wrote: > > On 06/11/13 12:56 PM, yac wrote: > >> On Wed, 06 Nov 2013 16:48:54 +0100 Alexis Ballier > >> wrote: > >> > >>> On Wed, 2013-11-06 at 10:15 -0500, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: > >>>> However, it's been a long-standing general practise that if > >>>> there are no deps in the tree older than what is necessary for > >>>> a package, that package doesn't need to have a minimum version > >>>> on the dependency atom. As such, issues similar to this are > >>>> probably lying in wait all other the place in the tree. > >>> > >>> this is a common misconception: ebuilds must have min. deps > >>> matching their requirements (exactly because of this problem) > >>> > >>> it can be fixed on the user side by 'emerge -uDN world' meanwhile > >>> but this doesn't mean the ebuild doesn't have a bug, even if > >>> minor > >>> > >>> Alexis. > >> > >> When I started contributing via sunrise, I've been adding the > >> minimal versions of dependencies as declared by upstream but I met > >> with very strict enforcement of the policy to not specify minimal > >> version if all the ones in current tree satisfies. > >> > >> Is it documented somewhere or is it just unwritten consensus? > >> > >> What I see is only Ebuild Policy [1e] which doesn't deal with > >> this. > >> > >> .. [1e] > >> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?part=3D2&ch= ap=3D1 > >> > >> > > I searched as well, and couldn't find anything documented one way or > > the other, either. I concluded that it's unwritten consensus. > > > > That's the main reason I wanted to start this discussion -- to > > effectively start documenting it and get dev's all on the same page. > > To be honest I think it should be policy or at least a written-down > > guideline, that dev's should do this within reason -- if an > > older-than-minimum version of something has been in the tree within > > the past year. Gone for more than a year should be safe, I expect. > > >=20 > I don't think a time limit is necessary here. If there is an > identified incompatibility, we should update DEPEND. >=20 > Note that I do not expect devs to go out of their way to test for the > oldest supported version of a dependency; they just shouldn't close > bugs as INVALID of someone else has done the work. >=20 +1 very much. --- Jan Mat=C4=9Bjka | Gentoo Developer https://gentoo.org | Gentoo Linux GPG: A33E F5BC A9F6 DAFD 2021 6FB6 3EBF D45B EEB6 CA8B --Sig_/1d0KKkcTs9K+0PfU47KInbo Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJSepASAAoJEIN+7RD5ejahTkoH/R0x7DjjPMGVkDV6sBKgDfFg NaJW2nohOK3+EMkROdR06//bwMjUfx5nK7AGSb/1gfFYQ5bV9LPfIKBH8nDqwfhW pXm+5QlZ/z/grqtfPZJINGw9WgxwAp/cwQLYwNUQiC1PQKMkYioLcXOXNdVC2Shn yJ5kuytj6tV/KOBl4ng1ziatIxd2X18E0fpjp1sUQ0/jDaTW9YoCdsfRAmvK5HTx e5sLv2drRNqfVzmGxWw6hIBmgcRgPRjDF7yhNpvaJX8hUlephvM7qVWmlmxQw5bP tpdTGD5hQdX6BoyJctvpFScYjtCD9eWcYdKWAtL3oy1NEqWRKomlMU++fKo2hpk= =r/Z/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/1d0KKkcTs9K+0PfU47KInbo--