AFAIK I created v4 because of a breaking change to testing importing gocheck from its new location, but we have to update the world before we can land the dependencies.tsv changes.
John =:-> On Sep 23, 2014 4:24 PM, "Dimiter Naydenov" <[email protected]> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hi all, > > I noticed a recent change in juju/juju bumping the revision of a > sub-repo (in this case "juju/charms"), which should be fine if the > sub-repo wasn't imported with a versioned path > ("github.com/juju/charm.v3"). The commit in question is: > > https://github.com/juju/juju/commit/7694614984932598535639e09129820f15b9d58d > > The problem is with gopkg.in/juju/charm.v3 specifically, as there are > a few other cases of bumping the sub-repo revision in dependencies.tsv > and not issuing a new version: > > https://github.com/juju/juju/commit/7694614984932598535639e09129820f15b9d58d > > https://github.com/juju/juju/commit/c35c4dfb19544667225a3e4b5141c85ccbc011bd > > In fact there is a v4 branch: https://github.com/juju/charm/compare/v4 > which is already 3 commits ahead of v3, but juju-core still uses v3. > > My point is, we need to discuss and define a policy how to handle > dependencies with versioned import paths. From a user's perspective, > importing "gopkg.in/juju/charm.v3" should (AIUI) *always* pull the > same source and you can rely on it being stable and not need to update > it until you need something from v3. For all other cases > (non-versioned paths) we use godeps with handles it nicely, without > claiming to provide stable versions. > > So, let's agree to only use versioned imports as dependencies as they > were intended: > 1) Stick with (e.g.) "gopkg.in/juju/charm.v3" in both > dependencies.tsv and across the juju-core source. > 2) If the sub-repo has changes that juju-core needs, create a "vX" > branch in the sub-repo with the changes (X = current+1, i.e. branch v4 > from v3) and land this first, then change dependencies.tsv in > juju-core to use the new "gopkg.in/juju/charm.v4" and its revision. > > Any thoughts? > - -- > Dimiter Naydenov <[email protected]> > juju-core team > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1 > > iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUIWZcAAoJENzxV2TbLzHwfy0H/1/Mzl+sgmS+GQqdjSqn2HeQ > JH3I2Eex3iGOiJnftIjM79Sai4JjGl4F21zkKIkEowx6RcAWAKXjYGqg5+cH33Gc > w6JSYuC19n4kXG+BMZn4l/Cj6idKG5o5W2pPhTTM1RqPCSAP1H5ChkSJKWHEDXvz > Tkts85VBvx2iasd1sDF7UgulehFkwsHc6xZ19sjvS2CVeI8qczIwAN+oAxwzCeKN > NIEeaGNrLmemwelIxRAbr9d6/4kwySGI95G6X3bBVFs/WWgSBJvkzS7op3+i+DgN > uQDT9w6DKZekESmEcJOKuExVY5n+WarJfObUdIxXa9IlZlEFOCqcWu/OjxIapFs= > =7Yys > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > -- > Juju-dev mailing list > [email protected] > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev >
-- Juju-dev mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
