On Thu, 2019-09-26 at 11:20 -0700, Tom Stellard wrote: > On 09/26/2019 11:03 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > We are currently in the "Beta to Pre Release" phase of the release > > cycle. The updates policy for this phase - > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy#Beta_to_Pre_Release - > > says: > > > > "From this point onwards maintainers MUST[1]: > > > > Avoid Major version updates, ABI breakage or API changes if at all > > possible." > > > > However, it seems a major new release of LLVM is appearing in F31 at > > present, and AFAIK there has been no discussion or communication about > > this at all. > > > > LLVM 9 is currently in the buildroot, and an update with a very short > > description has been submitted: > > > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-b83bd6b46c > > > > (it just says "Update for LLVM 9 rebase.", which is odd since it *is* > > the LLVM 9 rebase). > > > > There is no Change for this, I can't find a mail about it anywhere, > > it's just been sort of dumped in. Is there enough grounds for dumping > > in a major new LLVM and violating the update policy at this point in > > the F31 release? > > > > There are compatibility packages included in the update, so there should not > be any ABI breakage from this update. Also, what exactly is the main > issue right now? Is it the buildroot overrides? This is what caused me to notice it, yes. Another update got built against LLVM 9 because it was in the buildroot, which means that update is now not installable without the LLVM 9 update: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-52ecb9952b openQA caught this, which put me onto the change. Having compatibility packages is great, but it doesn't save us if there turns out to be a problem in LLVM 9 itself. The rule about not doing major changes after Beta is not really about breaking ABI for existing packages, it is about the major changes themselves introducing instability and potentially new bugs at a point in the cycle when we are *supposed* to be stabilizing towards a final release. I'm sure upstream you have a rule that no-one lands a major change to LLVM shortly before a new release goes out, right? E.g. if you do release candidates, you wouldn't expect someone to rewrite some large element between RC1 and RC2. The Fedora update policy is simply following that principle at the distribution level. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
