On Thu, 2019-09-26 at 20:55 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On 26-09-2019 20:47, Tom Stellard wrote: > > On 09/26/2019 11:24 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > 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. > > > > > > > Ok, what's the best way to resolve this issue? Do you want me to > > cancel the update and overrides and re-submit after f31-final is out? If there's a sufficient justification for including LLVM 9, we still can. I just wanted to flag up that it was happening and that it *shouldn't* happen without sufficient justification, and probably without more communication about it. Like, a mail to devel@ "hold onto your hats, we're going to upgrade llvm in f31 because X, Y, Z" would've helped. > If I understand things correctly, there are currently separate > mesa and llvm updates for this in bodhi? That is never a good > idea when there are ABI dependencies between 2 updates, bodhi does > allow you to add multiple builds in a single update. > > So my 2 cents is that it would be best to cancel the separate > llvm bodhi update and add the llvm build to the mesa update, then > the update will be self contained / cleanly apply to current F31 stable. So far as resolving this issue goes, the llvm update has like 11 packages in it, the mesa update has 1. So it would make a deal more sense to unpush the *mesa* update and add a mesa build to the llvm update. Note that Bodhi will not let you add a package to two updates - even if one of them is unpushed - so to get the exact same mesa build in an update you would need help from someone with superpowers who could go do nasty things in the database to override this. The easier trick is simply to bump and rebuild mesa with no changes, and add *that* mesa build to the llvm update. You *could* also just leave them separate so long as you make sure not to push the mesa update stable before the llvm one. It is better to get this right in the first place and put all the packages into one update, but if you wind up with them separate and are careful about the push order it won't cause any huge problems (it just causes things like openQA test failures that attract angry QA people :>) -- 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
