Am 2017-01-05 22:32, schrieb Adriaan de Groot:
So what's the impact?

Twofold: for CI it causes failing builds. We should consider that red-flag property of CI to be a *good* thing -- because it indicates something changed in our assumptions or in the code, and the source is no longer good (green),
for some suitable definition of "good".

And for distro's, there's an upcoming problem, as indicated by Kevin Kofler.
I'd flag the same thing: it's unpleasant when packaging <X> turns into
packaging <X>, <X'>, <X''> .. because of dependencies the packagers didn't
know about beforehand.

On Thursday 05 January 2017 21:49:52 Martin Gräßlin wrote:
.. I think that this dependency is way more important to overall
KWin than a few people having to manually build xkbcommon. Which is
fairly trivial as David showed in his reply to the thread ..

The impact is mostly because the automated systems don't know all that much about dependency bumps, and also really aren't ready for manually-building- stuff. As Martin has pointed out, there *is* now a release to build against, so
this concrete case is not in the realm of random-GitHub-commit.

To specify even better, it's the case:

Package foo depends on a newer version of the already existing dependency bar
which does not introduce any new dependency itself.


It is, however, a burden to CI and packagers. CI -- or rather the people behind CI, which I guess are largely Ben and Scarlett -- does its darnedest to give us an accurate picture of the state of KDE software. Packagers are the
people who get the software in the hands of users.

For packagers it should not matter at all. This is the most common situation for distribution. And in the release of e.g. Plasma they have to handle this for
hundreds of updated dependencies.

It's also not unexpected, because we have a dependency freeze in place prior to
the release, thus the dependencies are announced way ahead.

It's only a "problem" for distros if they want to backport to an older release as in the case of Fedora. Honestly I consider this unreasonably. If you don't have a problem with backporting hundreds of packages I don't think that the one additional
package is a problem.

Socially, we can try to keep CI (through sysadmin-tickets) and packagers (through the distributions@ list) informed of changes in dependencies, so that
those groups can respond in a timely fashion.

Honestly I would consider it spaming the distribution mailing list if I announce a new dependency which most distributions have already integrated at the time of the increase of the dependency. (In this specific case it was already part of e.g. Opensuse tumbleweed, Debian Testing, Ubuntu 17.04, Arch, ... - yes I did my lesson
before increasing the dependency).

The problem in my opinion lies somewhere else. We are used to ensure that distros can package our software. That is we check that the next release will have the
dependency. We are targeting a newer stack. But CI is on an older stack.

I don't really see a good solution to this problem. This is a problem which will come up again and we have had quite often in the past. KWin requires overall a way more modern stack than our CI system provides. In most cases that's handled by a PPA.

Cheers
Martin

Reply via email to