Matt Turner <matts...@gentoo.org> writes: > Hello, > > Many of us have started using `pkgdev bugs` to file stabilization > bugs. It works well (Thanks Arthur!) and I encourage everyone to give > it a try. > > Where possible, it files one stabilization bug per package. This makes > arch testers' jobs easier and makes the task easier to automate. > > But sometimes we do want to stabilize packages together. For example > major versions of x11-wm/mutter and gnome-base/gnome-shell are tied > together. If a new mutter is stabilized without the new gnome-shell, > the tree will still be consistent, but emerge -u @world will warn > users that the mutter upgrade is blocked. >
Big fan of the idea & very much in support of it. This also serves to give us logical groupings of packages which are closely related and should be bumped together. > There was some brief discussion on IRC about how to document these > groupings, and two main ideas were suggested: > > - add a field to metadata.xml to specify the group by an arbitrary name. > E.g. <stable-group name="..."/> > Each package in the group would specify the same value of name="..." > > - maintain the groups in a separate place (similar to portage @sets). > > Can anyone think of particular advantages or disadvantages to one > solution versus the other? Any other (better) ideas? > When we discussed this a few months ago on IRC, I also brought up a related point: [2023-05-02T18:38:51+0100] <@sam_> do we want to repeat the group members in each member, or do tools need to scan for each thing? [2023-05-02T18:39:07+0100] <@sam_> i.e. does each member have <stable-group><pkg>...</pkg></stable-group>, or do we do <stable-group name=".../>? [2023-05-02T18:39:26+0100] <@arthurzam> I think each package says which groups it is part of [2023-05-02T18:39:44+0100] <@radhermit> I would do the latter [...] [2023-05-02T18:42:42+0100] <@radhermit> technically you could also maintain them in a separate place like metadata/groups and layer inter-group dependencies on top of that somehow in the format I'd prefer the metadata/ at repo root idea because I can see updating various metadata.xmls being a nuisance. best, sam
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
