On Thu, Jun 11, 2015, at 08:56 PM, Sebastian Kügler wrote: > On Tuesday, June 09, 2015 10:08:06 Christian Mollekopf wrote: > > I'm sorry for the friction this causes right now, but in the long run I > > really don't see how this makes life harder for everyone else. > > Here's an example from some recent packaging experiments. I wrote a > script to > update the packages, with frameworks, it was a very easy thing, I change > one > global version number, and I could check out a tag (same tag for every > framework) from git, then roll a tarball from those tags and build it. > Verifying that everything's OK was again a matter of checking the results > against one single version. > > This process would have been a LOT more work with different version > numbers, let alone some packages being excluded in certain releases, because > all > of a sudden, I'd have to keep track of all this manually. >
Getting the latest tag on master is entirely possible without knowing the version number (git describe --abbrev=0 --tags). Verifying that everything is ok indeed would be a bit more involved. So yes, it can get a bit more complex, but not a whole lot really. > Let's not forget that we're talking about a few hundred deployers here, > and > perhaps a lot more we don't know about, and then hopefully a whole lot > more in > the future. The consistency across frameworks at this basic project > management > level just cannot be underestimated, and that's why I think that the > proposal > of different versions, and different modules per release of frameworks is > a /really bad idea/. I absolutely agree with our point that we should keep things for deployers as easy as possible, and I think that is entirely possible with a reasonable amount of effort. I'm also very willing to propose solutions for problems that I'm made aware of. Cheers, Christian _______________________________________________ release-team mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team
