Re: Polymake soname bump
Maxwell G via devel wrote: > ABI incompatible updates are against the Updates Policy for stable > releases: > >> ABI changes in general are very strongly discouraged, they force >> larger update sets on users and they make life difficult for >> third-party packagers. > > -- > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/#stable-releases Bumping the soname of a library with only a handful, or even, as in this case, only one single, dependent package(s), as a grouped update together with those dependent package(s), is not what I would call an "ABI incompatible update". Of course, the more packages depend on the library, the more you want to avoid bumping their ABI in an update. Kevin Kofler ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Polymake soname bump
On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 4:08 PM Maxwell G via devel wrote: > ABI incompatible updates are against the Updates Policy for stable > releases: > > > ABI changes in general are very strongly discouraged, they force > > larger update sets on users and they make life difficult for > > third-party packagers. > > -- https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/#stable-releases They are very strongly discouraged, not forbidden. In this case, a "larger update set" will not be forced on any user. It will be two packages: polymake itself, and python-jupymake. As for making life difficult for 3rd party packagers, there are no consumers of the polymake library in the package sets of the most popular third party repositories. And the new version is backwards API compatible with the old version, so even if there is some polymake library consumer out there, all they have to do is rebuild. (There are quite a few consumers of the polymake binary, but the command line is also backwards compatible, so none of them need rebuilding.) The overriding concern for me is the bugs fixed in the new release. I'll bet you a nickel that if you find some random polymake users and ask them if they want this update, they will all say yes. -- Jerry James http://www.jamezone.org/ ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Polymake soname bump
On Mon Dec 19, 2022 at 15:56 -0700, Jerry James wrote: > On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 3:54 PM Maxwell G via devel > wrote: > > On Mon Dec 19, 2022 at 14:10 -0700, Jerry James wrote: > > > If all goes well, I will do the same for F37. > > > > I don't think this soname bump should happen in a stable release. > > Because ... ? The new version is backwards API compatible (although > not ABI compatible) with the previous version, I'm going to rebuild > the only consumer of the library, and the new version fixes bugs. > What is your objection? ABI incompatible updates are against the Updates Policy for stable releases: > ABI changes in general are very strongly discouraged, they force > larger update sets on users and they make life difficult for > third-party packagers. -- https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/#stable-releases -- Maxwell G (@gotmax23) Pronouns: He/Him/His ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Polymake soname bump
On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 3:54 PM Maxwell G via devel wrote: > On Mon Dec 19, 2022 at 14:10 -0700, Jerry James wrote: > > If all goes well, I will do the same for F37. > > I don't think this soname bump should happen in a stable release. Because ... ? The new version is backwards API compatible (although not ABI compatible) with the previous version, I'm going to rebuild the only consumer of the library, and the new version fixes bugs. What is your objection? -- Jerry James http://www.jamezone.org/ ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Polymake soname bump
On Mon Dec 19, 2022 at 14:10 -0700, Jerry James wrote: > If all goes well, I will do the same for F37. I don't think this soname bump should happen in a stable release. -- Maxwell G (@gotmax23) Pronouns: He/Him/His ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
