On Sat, May 25, 2024 at 3:09 AM Volker Krause <vkra...@kde.org> wrote:
> On Freitag, 24. Mai 2024 12:24:16 CEST Ben Cooksley wrote: > > On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 4:13 AM Volker Krause <vkra...@kde.org> wrote: > > > On Mittwoch, 22. Mai 2024 10:27:07 CEST Ben Cooksley wrote: > > > > On Wed, May 22, 2024 at 9:24 AM Albert Astals Cid <aa...@kde.org> > wrote: > > > > > Please work on fixing them, otherwise i will remove the failing CI > > > > > > jobs on > > > > > > > > their 4th failing week, it is very important that CI is passing for > > > > > multiple > > > > > reasons. > > > > > > > > > > Good news: 8 repositories fixed > > > > > > > > > > Bad news: 6 new repositories started failing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > kio-gdrive - NEW > > > > > > > > > > * https://invent.kde.org/network/kio-gdrive/-/pipelines/693840 > > > > > > > > > > * Qt 5.15 is unbuildable because needs libkgapi and we don't > have a > > > > > > Qt5 > > > > > > > > CI > > > > > build of libkgapi anymore. This is REAL BAD. > > > > > > > > Looks like kio-gdrive needs to drop the support it has for Qt 5? > > > > Can't really see another path forward as libkgapi has no support for > Qt > > > > 5 > > > > anymore. > > > > > > > > This is alas one of those very difficult to solve issues, especially > > > > when > > > > semi-leaf projects like libkgapi are used more widely. > > > > > > Would it work to have a kf5 branch rule for libkgapi pointing to the > last > > > branch with Qt 5 support (and similar for all its dependencies)? > > > > Unfortunately not possible i'm afraid - as release/23.08 is no longer > > supported (as no further releases are being made). > > I therefore terminated all CI support for that branch to ensure that any > > issues like this one were forced to the surface. > > But do we actually need CI for libkgapi for this? We only need it > available as > a dependency, so theoretically even distro packages in the CI image would > work > (I'm very reluctant to try that though, as that might have all kinds of > surprising side-effects due to whatever else that might pull in (e.g. > ECM)). > Therefore the idea to let the seed job provide it, by means of a kf5 > branch > rule. > Distribution packages definitely won't work :) Unfortunately the seed jobs can't help here, as the entirety of release/23.08 has been dropped from the CI system. There are also rules in place to continually re-drop any release/23.08 packages that do appear in the system. > > > The dependency chain is also @same as both are part of KDE Gear so from a > > technical perspective that doesn't work either. > > It's @stable and @latest-kf6 depending on the Qt version in kio-gdrive, > and > inside libkgapi it's @latest for its KF5 dependencies, which seems correct > IIUC? > @stable for the relationship between libkgapi and kio-gdrive isn't correct as they're both within KDE Gear no? > > > From a practical perspective, i'm not sure you can really release > something > > as part of a bundle that needs something from an older release of that > same > > bundle in order to build... > > We already have that mixed scenario anyway in 24.02 it seems, so that is > apparently working. > I'm only aware of one case where that happened, which was a special one off as KF5 apps needed the Qt 5 plugins still? (I think this was kio-extras) Perhaps we need to ask distributions to treat kio-gdrive the same? > > > The only fix is to either drop Qt 5 support from kio-gdrive, or to > restore > > Qt 5 support to libkgapi. > > Don't get me wrong, I'm all for retiring Qt5 stuff as soon as we can, but > I > fear this isn't the only place where we will hit this problem, and not all > of > those might be able to do that just yet. > In an ideal world, applications (the leaves) would drop Qt 5 support first, and then once all consumers had migrated away the libraries would start dropping support. Not sure why libkgapi had to rush to drop Qt 5.... > > Regards, > Volker Cheers, Ben
