On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 12:12:53AM +0800, Zhu, Peter J wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [email protected]
> > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Shane Bryan
> > Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 11:28 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Cc: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [meego-packaging] Send notifications if ABI/API changes
> > 
> > On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 04:02:31PM +0100, [email protected] wrote:
> > > 1. list the symbols exported by your library (current package)
> > > 2. list the symbols exported by your library (new package)
> > > 3. compare the symbols and check for ABI breakage
> > 
> > None of these help in the cases where there is no library between the
> > applications and the services they depend on, such as DBus services.
> > 
> > For example, oFono and connman.  Until recently, there were no supported
> > or maintained Qt APIs for these, so most apps that use them, do so through
> > straight QDBus interfaces, which, as you know, do not have headers or
> > symbols available in the build environment that are checkable like these.
> > 
> > It's even more complicated since the services are not build requirements
> > at all, just runtime install requirements (and really, as Jussi pointed out,
> > not even a true requirement, as their abscence can usually be handled
> > gracefully).
> > 
> > With the recent introduction of libofono-qt, this could be improved, in
> > that now this problem could be minimized to just libofono-qt and ofono
> > (assuming all apps move to using it).  But libofono-qt will still need to
> > be tracking to specific versions of ofono unless someone owns verifying all
> > functionality (which, btw, is impossible, due to differences in carrier
> > services, networks, etc) or at least, looking for both name and behavior
> > differences in the ofono DBus APIs.
> > 
> Yes, for dbus service/interface changes, it must be raised by ofono MeeGo
> maintainers in this case by sending the notification with detail info. 

Agreed
 
> > This problem has bit us many many times, and as of yet, I've seen only
> > so-so ideas, and no true "ownership" from QA or package maintainers on
> > coming up with a real solution (if one exists).
> > 
> Package owners must do this rather than rely on QA finding bugs after it's 
> already in MeeGo. 

This only works if we (package owners and/or developers) are aware that:
1) New version is being released, triggering us to check
2) We monitor all possible ML that impact our app/package

At the moment, both of these are manual actions that are prone to
information overload (too many emails) and plain human error (changes/diffs
too large to pick out all that could affect our apps/packages)

Shane...
_______________________________________________
MeeGo-packaging mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-packaging

Reply via email to