On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 12:06 AM, Dan Horák <d...@danny.cz> wrote: > On Mon, 2 Dec 2013 21:42:10 -0700 > Dave Johansen <davejohan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 8:19 AM, Kevin Fenzi <ke...@scrye.com> wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 2 Dec 2013 09:45:44 +0400 > > > Peter Lemenkov <lemen...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Hello All! > > > > > > > > 2013/12/2 Dave Johansen <davejohan...@gmail.com>: > > > > > I recently submitted ODB 2.2 to the EPEL for EL 5/6 and version > > > > > 2.3 has been released ( > > > > > > http://codesynthesis.com/pipermail/odb-announcements/2013/000037.html > > > > > ). The wiki seems to indicate that updating software for feature > > > > > releases is discouraged ( > > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL_Updates_Policy#Stable_Releases > > > > > ), so is updating ODB to 2.3 in the EPEL not really possible? > > > > > Assuming that's the case, is there a recommended solution for > > > > > maintaining access to newer versions of ODB for EL users? > > > > > > > > ODB is still a "young" package (in terms of existing in EL > > > > repositories) so I would update it anyway. However in the future > > > > ypu'd better to provide parallel-installable odb30, odb40 etc > > > > packages. > > > > > > The questions to ask are: > > > > > > Does the upgrade require intervention? ie, if someone did the > > > upgrade would they have to manually change config files, or migrate > > > databases or whatever? > > > > > > > No, the 2.3 version just adds some features and there wouldn't be any > > needed changes to config files or databases to support the update. > > > > > > > Next, is the package a gui one that changes look and feel? ie, would > > > some user who updated suddenly have to relearn where the various > > > options are? > > > > > > > There's no GUI or user facing part of it, so it would be effect > > developers but not users. > > > > > > > Finally, does it change abi/api any? If it was updated would people > > > have to rebuild other things to work with it? > > > > > > > There were additions to the API to support the new features and I'm > > guessing that there may be ABI changes as well. Basically, I'm > > guessing that a rebuild would be necessary. > > you can easily check the possible API/ABI difference with the > abi-compliance-checker tool >
I put in a request to have it added to upstream-tracker.org and it looks like 2.3 does have ABI breakage issues: http://upstream-tracker.org/versions/libodb.html
_______________________________________________ epel-devel mailing list epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
