On Wed, 6 Nov 2013 13:22:13 -0500 Mike Gilbert <flop...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Ian Stakenvicius <a...@gentoo.org> > wrote: > > On 06/11/13 12:56 PM, yac wrote: > >> On Wed, 06 Nov 2013 16:48:54 +0100 Alexis Ballier > >> <aball...@gentoo.org> 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=2&chap=1 > >> > >> > > 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. > > > > I don't think a time limit is necessary here. If there is an > identified incompatibility, we should update DEPEND. > > 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. > +1 very much. --- Jan Matějka | Gentoo Developer https://gentoo.org | Gentoo Linux GPG: A33E F5BC A9F6 DAFD 2021 6FB6 3EBF D45B EEB6 CA8B
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
