[Bug 1092149] Review Request: dib-utils - Standalone parts of diskimage-builder

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1092149



--- Comment #4 from Steven Dake <sdake@xxxxxxxxxx> ---
(In reply to Ben Nemec from comment #3)
> Thanks for the review.  Some responses:
> 
> * I will bump the diskimage-builder version used.  I just didn't realize .14
> was released yet.
> 

yup should be an easy adjustment

> * I don't know what upstream will do with the versioning on this new
> project/package, so I figured I would start at 0.0.1 and if they decide to
> match diskimage-builder then I can always bump the rpm version too.  If I
> start at 0.1.14 and they decide to go with 0.0.1 I think that would be a
> problem.
> 

Set Version field to 0.0.0 so upgrades work (if 0.0.1 is the first release, an
upgrade will correctly upgrade - if you start with 0.0.1 yum won't upgrade as
expected).


> * There's a bit of a timing issue with version capping the conflict, at
> least until I know which release of diskimage-builder is going to have
> dib-run-parts removed.  I could remove dib-run-parts in the
> diskimage-builder spec, but then diskimage-builder would have a dependency
> on this package, so this has to be available before any package of
> diskimage-builder that doesn't include dib-run-parts.  It's doable, but
> possibly more complicated since this is a new package?

release both dib and dib-utils together both as a combined update - and update
the dib-run-parts to indicate the current version is a conflict.  Use the
release field as part of the version conflict.  I suspect this should work.


> 
> So I guess it would be a little simpler to wait and resolve the conflict
> once the upstream split happens, but I think I could do it now too if that
> would be preferable.  I'm not sure how big a deal the unversioned conflict
> is.

Yes please resolve the conflict before the upstream split happens - ideally
need to get this resolved before May 2nd (this Friday).  I believe my suggested
approach should work - if you run into trouble let the reviewer know.

Regards,
-steve

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review





[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]