On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 02:54:49PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > The enormous ABI transitions have been particularly hard, of course. If > we can avoid ABI-breaking transitions in the future it would help. :-)
Wholly unrealistic. Libraries *do* undergo ABI changes; there are only a handful of library upstreams who know how to write a library interface that's proofed against future design decisions, and in most cases it's not worth the effort to try to write libs this way -- and it wouldn't save us from C++ ABI changes anyway. > I think making a queue for transitions, so that they're basically one at a > time, would solve most remaining problems. Doesn't work when lib maintainers don't coordinate. A better option is to make britney more resilient in dealing with library transitions by keeping old binary packages around in testing instead of requiring them to be removed at the same time as the new version enters, which removes the need for all packages to be ready to enter testing at the same time. This has been on the TODO list since it was discussed this past March in Vancouver, and is currently the top item on Anthony Towns' britney hacking list at <http://www.erisian.com.au/market/>. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
