Dne 19. 06. 23 v 11:55 Ankur Sinha napsal(a):
On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 11:22:35 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:Right, not pushing to all branches is in line with official guidelines: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/#stable-releasesIt's more nuanced than "don't push updates to all branches" though: ".. we should avoid major updates of packages within a stable release. Updates should aim to fix bugs, and not introduce features, particularly when those features would materially affect the user or developer experience. The update rate for any given release should drop off over time, approaching zero near release end-of-life; since updates are primarily bugfixes, fewer and fewer should be needed over time." So minor/patch version updates, especially for things like Python packages that have frequent minor/patch releases is perfectly fine.Especially I don't like my packages being FTBFS due to other packagers pushing their updates everywhere. If there was at least included mass-prebuild step in the initial list to ensure there is no breakage in dependent packages.This is part of the "vetting the update before pushing" step. We have tools that package maintainers can/should use to see what packages depend on a particular one before updating it (fedrq is one I believe, but folks have their own dnf based scripts/commands). I've also filed an RFE to the-new-hotness to add dependency information to the "new package version is available" bug report some time ago, which would help ensure maintainers are aware of the update's impact: https://github.com/fedora-infra/the-new-hotness/issues/545 We're discussing a different topic now.
Sorry but we don't. The thread started with: "For the 99% of packages I maintain I usually perform the same workflow when updating them". I don't see that percentage could be in line with the update policy.
The thread was "these steps are repetitive, how do folks automate them", and we're now discussing "maintainers should remember to check the impact of update before pushing them".
Being maintainer of ~200 packages, I certainly don't suffer the repetitiveness, because there is rarely need to update the stable releases, following the update policy.
Vít
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ 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 Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
