On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Neal Gompa <ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 1:52 PM, Matthew Miller >> <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 01:27:45PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: >>>> > Yes, THIS. Our current model does not really allow us to express this >>>> > at all -- there's "orphaned", but that's not user-visible. >>>> Our current model actually could express this though. We could put >>>> the weakly maintained packages in COPRs, and editions that wish to >>>> include them can do so in their default repos. There is also the >>>> previous idea of the curated COPR playground. >>>> We have the tools, we just need to use them. >>> >>> One problem is that weakly maintained packages are often dependencies >>> and libraries. They're weakly maintained because the person packaging >>> them never really cared about them for their own sake, only for some >>> other application which needs them. That application may be strongly >>> maintained, but the various deps only updated when some issue affects >>> that app. I guess the whole thing could go into a COPR in this kind of >>> case, but I'm not sure that's quite right. >>> >>> >> >> The fundamental problem with this in COPR is that COPR doesn't know >> how to do automatic rebuilds based on changes in the repos it uses. >> For example, with my OBS projects, when the Rawhide repodata is >> updated, OBS automatically properly bumps the Release and rebuilds the >> package so that it works properly with whatever changed in the >> repositories. COPR lacks this capability, but it is needed for >> something like that to work. > > Koji doesn't do this either, yet we seem to get by. I'm not sure I > follow why auto-rebuild is a requirement versus a (very) nice to have. > Koji doesn't do it, because packagers are supposed to rebuild things when they update stuff. When everything is in one place (a single Koji instance), it's easy enough to pull off. And Bodhi catches dep errors on submission of updates if the checks are enabled. Once things are scattered across different systems or instances of systems, it gets really messy and broken. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
