So do you see any solution/improvement for this issue? I repeatedly reported the breakages, I made some proposals (as simple as "send an email"), which IMO should improve the situation, but it seems that you prefer to keep status quo. Vít Dne 15.3.2016 v 11:18 Richard Hughes napsal(a): > On 15 March 2016 at 10:00, Vít Ondruch <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> So lets say I am using Gnome 3.19.90. The 3.19.91 is released and you >> start build, which takes some time (12h? 24h? 2 days? Have no idea). > Building all the components in mclazy takes a couple of hours. The > issue is that not all GNOME modules release on the same day, > especially when we're early in the development cycle. > >> 1) Minimalist solution is to announce that you are building new version >> of Gnome and breakage can be expected. I would happily wait for the >> announcement of rebuild done to be sure that I get the whole Gnome >> update at once. > We'd never know when we're waiting for new tarballs, projects don't > actually have to release a tarball on release day. Some are always > late, some never come at all... Delaying the automated building by a > week would be one solution, but late in the dev cycle where .91 -> .92 > is two weeks this doesn't work so well. > >> 2) Use side tag for Rawhide builds > I think that would be even more confusing for projects that are not > quite core GNOME, e.g. NetworkManager needing a new glib. We'd have to > get any project depending on the core GNOME stuff to also build in the > side tag for the duration of the delayed push, which we don't even > know how long would be for. If you want to manage this that's fine, > but for me I'd just stop building for rawhide as it's just too much > hassle. It's already a chore, and with the advent of xdg-app and the > coming push of the atomic image, rawhide isn't something GNOME > developers actually need. I'm not trying to be facetious, I'm just > saying that you can't solve a social problem with guidelines, and if > you make something that's already a chore a logistical and technical > nightmare (with people that shout at you when you get it wrong) then > nobody is going to bother. > >> 3) Specify more precisely the dependencies between Gnome project, e.g. >> gnome-terminal-3.19.91-1.fc25.x86_64 has to work only with >> vte291-0.43.91-1.fc25.x86_64 and nothing else, because this is how they >> were tested > I'd hope upstream projects update the deps on things like > gsettings-desktop-schemas when new versions are required. It's > certainly what I do. > > Richard. > -- > devel mailing list > devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
