On 09/15/2015 07:51 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 10:27 AM, Matthew Miller
<mat...@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 02:19:38PM -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
Let's say ring 0 isn't self hosting, but ring 0 + 1 ring is. Can we
offer a longer term of support for ring 0 than ring 1? What happens
when a bug in ring 0 requires a fix in ring 1, but the support
window for ring 1 has closed? That's the main thing that's worrying
about a free-for-all with self hosting.
I think the main risk here, at least from a fast-moving-Fedora
perspective, is that the build-dep in Ring 1 gets updated to be too new
to build the Ring 0 package. (Or, less likely but possible, dropped
entirely before Ring 0 support term ends.)
This can be addressed by having a Ring 1 policy that packages may
change, but all currently-supported Ring 0s need to be buildable from
the latest Ring 1. If a Ring 1 update would be break that, a compat
package would be required.
The "if" is key there. Right now, rawhide breaks all the time because
people are not aware ahead of time if something is going to break when
they update package foo. Without automated testing around "what
happens to Ring 0/1 if I bump foo", I'm afraid we'd be left in the
exact same state.
As you say, this is a long standing issue. It would be really helpful
if we had some automated mechanism that upon rebase, all packages that
used the rebase package as a BuildRequires was auto-scratch-built.
Failure notice could go to both package owners. Would this be a
spamathon or genuinely helpful?
Or, a more complicated but more flexible rule: assuming that we have
multiple Ring 1s going at a time (as we currently have F21, F22,
F23-branch, and F24-rawhide), there must be _some_ currently-active
Ring 1 which would build every active Ring 0, but not necessarily the
same one. So maybe Ring 0 version A would be slated to last through EOL
of Ring 1 F25, and then Ring 1 F23, F24, F25 would all need to be able
to build it, but F26 and F27 wouldn't (so compat packages could be
retired if they're not needed for Ring 0 version B).
That makes my head hurt even more. If Ring 0 can be built by Ring 1
A, Ring 1 B, and Ring 1 C, which is actually used to build Ring 0 that
is shipped? How does one do recreatable builds across all
permutations of Ring0/1? And if all permutations must be tested, how
is that _any_ different than just having it all in the same ring and
simply not bumping certain packages?
You probably use the latest Ring 1 to build Ring 0. That would be
crazy, but we keep the ABI/API generating pieces in Ring 0 so it's not
too bad.
--
Brendan Conoboy / RHEL Development Coordinator / Red Hat, Inc.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
