On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 9:06 AM Michael Orlitzky <m...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > It's easy to say "well this is not an issue because it can be solved by > <thing no package manager does and is not part of the PMS>..." > > If it's easy, get it added to the PMS and I'll agree with you. >
Current Gentoo policy: "Maintainers must not assume that dynamic dependencies will be applied by the package manager. When changing runtime dependencies the maintainer should revision the ebuild if the changes are likely to cause problems for end users." [1] Certainly having a discussion about whether this could change down the road is reasonable, but keep in mind this would require package managers to actually be changed, which requires code. Out of the box portage has issues with dynamic deps[2] so it isn't a solved problem on any package manager, let alone all of them. In the interim, devs MUST revbump in these situations. The Council left some room for discretion, and as a result I end up having portage rebuild everything on changed deps because frankly I don't trust people to get it right, since if people can't see for themselves the reason for a rule it seems to be a reason to ignore it. The rule is also documented in the devmanual[3]. 1 - https://projects.gentoo.org/council/meeting-logs/20151011-summary.txt 2 - https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Portage/Changed_Deps#Ebuild_Revision_Bumps 3 - https://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/ebuild-revisions/index.html -- Rich
