Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] patchlevel policy

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Eric Sandall <eric AT sandall.us>
  • To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] patchlevel policy
  • Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 21:44:11 -0800

On Thursday 08 March 2007 18:32:19 David Kowis wrote:
> Jeremy Blosser wrote:
> > Forget that one for a minute -- we currently make them recompile for file
> > location changes that don't break anything, eg if a man page changes
> > location. Assuming man could already find it, what is broken there that
> > needs fixing?
>
> Yeah that's really annoying. I've never liked having to recompile
> something just to fix a small file glitch. Like, for example, the glibc
> recompile to acquire the new timezone files.

That's actually somewhat important if you work in the United States of
America. ;)

<snip>
> Yes, some sort of prioritized queue ability would be preferential here.
>
> queue --all
> queue --security
> queue --functional
>
> or whatever levels of patchworthyness we define
> Major.Minor.Patchlevel doesn't really apply here so it'd be better to
> have them
>
> PATCHLEVEL=security.functional.trivial
>
> If we want to conserve our variables. Just some thoughts.
>
> David

I believe *any* functional change to a package should warrant some observable
and queueable change. If the above wouldn't be too much overhead to parse,
then I'd say it's one of the better approaches. Many people already
understand the x.y.z versioning scheme, this one just replaces the
terminology, though not necessarlily the entire meaning.

-sandalle

--
Eric Sandall | Source Mage GNU/Linux Developer
eric AT sandall.us PGP: 0xA8EFDD61 | http://www.sourcemage.org/
http://eric.sandall.us/ | http://counter.li.org/ #196285

Attachment: pgpqg6HedYWYM.pgp
Description: PGP signature




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page