On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 9:24 AM, Richard Hughes <hughsient@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 15 March 2016 at 09:17, Vít Ondruch <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> I'm somewhat confused where the problem is. >> This is the problem: >> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/CI57RU5TGQZFGVTUJKM6S6WU2NU4VION/ > > This isn't anything to do with the gnome-shell version being different > to the other components. > >> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/I47GW5IGT55JIOIGYJOSXFDT5WTBBA2L/ > > That wouldn't have been prevented using a side-tag either. Bugs happen > in development software, holding the push for an extra week wouldn't > have magically fixed that bug. It does in the case where things need to be rebuilt to fix the problem because you can rebuild everything in a side tag and tag them in all at once in a single transaction ensuring when the daily update goes out either everything or nothing is there. In the case of bugs in software development I thought that most of them should be picked up as part of gnome-continous, sure bugs happen but CI helps stop them from getting to end users. >> IOW you are keep changing API/ABI without proper .so name bumps and at >> the same time, you refuse to use side tag (which would limit the impact) >> for Rawhide builds. > > Okay, so the obvious solution is "don't put ABI-unstable development > GNOME packages into rawhide". We'd then be using a xdg-app enhanced > atomic image for all development, and then rawhide would rot. I think you're going a bit far here. I think what Vit is trying to say is that rawhide isn't just meant to be a dumping ground and that while there will be breakage it would be nice if things were co-ordinated as much as possible to minimise that. Doing mass bumps in a rawhide side tag would help with that. Peter -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
