> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shane Bryan [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2010 2:10 AM
> To: Zhu, Peter J
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [meego-packaging] Send notifications if ABI/API changes
> 
> 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)
> 
I mean owners of packages introducing ABI changes, not mean apps package 
owners. 

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

Reply via email to