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 6D50913827E for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 02:56:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3525DE0AB3; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 02:56:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vb0-f54.google.com (mail-vb0-f54.google.com [209.85.212.54]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4EA13E0963 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 02:56:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vb0-f54.google.com with SMTP id g10so116129vbg.27 for ; Sun, 08 Dec 2013 18:55:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=MmG2IMSV/DZXEvUd4sjEDhS3SCQX7KuLlohuGoaYefQ=; b=R1YfvTcYYd5zpSCBYiSEBEP5bIXyVmDeGBFZVa83d8zT44u0PLYwtZCqUKwirH6HeS 0gFxpKa3e/vrpNU8LVbaOKWXA5BrENNoQwBxHsh7XC/nwlMiPt/HSwdYZXt2h79lx4L+ SVmP6aokmD7V8JOATAB7jt3jlLIFYY61fX8j+O7d8kvVtgS/8CIV49Tqgb3V0GIgqSbD w0l1wvTeApQ61OBhYhBiZd1hyr0pp1Tcl3++o9JC8ZckdznM5k+O9KTizJMptvqps91g psyW3eqp4J3+7sLEJLgoOVrP7VeBxVqpt73RUTNVCdmkdWm7S4BTl6ih+N0Sbaf7o7ee 5APw== 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 X-Received: by 10.220.164.202 with SMTP id f10mr740378vcy.25.1386557759628; Sun, 08 Dec 2013 18:55:59 -0800 (PST) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.52.112.99 with HTTP; Sun, 8 Dec 2013 18:55:59 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <86wqjeu4vf.fsf@moguhome00.in.awa.tohoku.ac.jp> References: <20131208175612.2b8c7e38@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <201312081819.40449.dilfridge@gentoo.org> <21156.50471.613516.395616@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <21156.53244.886349.924357@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <86wqjeu4vf.fsf@moguhome00.in.awa.tohoku.ac.jp> Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2013 21:55:59 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: MvKdP6BbSbcGYSCHPijeqsd_IU4 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Dependencies default to accept any slot value acceptable (:*), can we default to :0 instead? From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Archives-Salt: 54b7e82b-cc6b-4961-b0c6-93aec911c43f X-Archives-Hash: 9934446a0360fde8c74534f129248a1f On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 9:37 PM, wrote: > > How about defining a QA workflow for introducing a new slot of a > library, such as "mask it and open a tracker bug until every individual > reverse dependencies are checked"? > The problem with this is that it puts the onus on the person who wants to make forward progress (adding support for a new library version). That means that they have incentive to either not bother with the new library version (causing Gentoo to stagnate), or use hacks like giving the library a new name (which we have examples in the tree of). Now, perhaps a more balanced approach might be to mask it and give 15 days notice on -dev, and then it can be unmasked. Anybody who cares about the library can test the new version, and if necessary update their dependencies to use the previous slot only (and if 15 days isn't enough time they can just update the dep right away and then update it again after they get around to testing it). Those who don't want to have to deal with that can just define their slot dependencies explicitly so that this policy will never apply to them. In order for a QA policy to be effective it has to either be minimally intrusive, or make the cost of compliance lower than the cost of workarounds or benign neglect. People don't HAVE to maintain packages, after all... Rich