Re: Getting package with lower version into extras-testing
Niels Breet wrote: > I can remove these packages through the packages interface, so that after > the cleanup you can proceed with promotion. > > Do you want me to do that? That would be great Niels! As I said everything >= 0.5.6. Also, if possible, please do the same for the Chinook and Diablo repository as there is also a version 1:0.5.7 which shouldn't be there. Sorry again for the work I´ve created. Thanks! Conny ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Getting package with lower version into extras-testing
On Tue, October 13, 2009 23:19, Cornelius Hald wrote: > On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 22:38 +0200, Jeremiah Foster wrote: > >> I strongly second Graham's point of view on this. Changing anything in >> the build system has a ripple effect on all packages and we can't afford >> a complete set of repository rebuilds at this point in time. Hopefully >> conforming to the current requirements of the build system, i.e. >> packages with a newer version get built, older packages do not, is not >> too burdensome. > > Ok I did this now. I have conboy-0.5.x now and conboy-unstable-0.6.x. > Unfortunately I still cannot get the updated 0.5.x package into > extras-testing as the promotion still does not work with the higher epoch. > I filed a bug here [1]. > Thanks, this will take a while for me to fix as this needs to be changed throughout the whole platform. > 2) Someone deletes all conboy packages with version >= 0.5.6 (including > all of 0.6.x) from extras-devel. If this would be possible I could remove > all the crap I since tried (like increasing the epoch etc.) and just > upload fresh working packages. This would only affect extras-devel. All > other repositories need no change. > I can remove these packages through the packages interface, so that after the cleanup you can proceed with promotion. Do you want me to do that? > > Thanks! > Conny > - Niels ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Getting package with lower version into extras-testing
On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 22:38 +0200, Jeremiah Foster wrote: > I strongly second Graham's point of view on this. Changing anything in > the build system has a ripple effect on all packages and we can't > afford a complete set of repository rebuilds at this point in time. > Hopefully conforming to the current requirements of the build system, > i.e. packages with a newer version get built, older packages do not, > is not too burdensome. Ok I did this now. I have conboy-0.5.x now and conboy-unstable-0.6.x. Unfortunately I still cannot get the updated 0.5.x package into extras-testing as the promotion still does not work with the higher epoch. I filed a bug here [1]. I don't know how long it will take to fix this and I could understand if it gets a low priority, because only me depends on it now. To resolve this issue quickly I only see two options: 1) I do a new package with higher epoch and higher version number. That would mean converting 1:0.5.7 into 2:0.6.0 (or something bigger than 0.6.0). I don't really like this, because it makes no sense from a versioning point of view. 2) Someone deletes all conboy packages with version >= 0.5.6 (including all of 0.6.x) from extras-devel. If this would be possible I could remove all the crap I since tried (like increasing the epoch etc.) and just upload fresh working packages. This would only affect extras-devel. All other repositories need no change. If you (Jeremiah) or Niels or someone how has the power could do that I would be really really grateful. I really screwed that up - so sorry for the work I create. Thanks! Conny [1] https://bugs.maemo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5416 P.S. There might be other options of course, or maybe fixing the bug is a quick thing. So I'm also happy about other input which might resolve this situation. ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Getting package with lower version into extras-testing
On Oct 13, 2009, at 15:20, Graham Cobb wrote: > On Tuesday 13 October 2009 13:46:25 Cornelius Hald wrote: >> Sorry to be so persistent, but I still don´t understand why I should >> have two packages. > > You are probably right that the root cause of the problem is that we > are using > extras-devel for two different purposes: it is a test area for very > early > versions of packages as well an important step on the way for > packages trying > to get to the users. Sometime we may have to split that up. > > However, at the moment, your requirement is unusual. The current > rules > (autobuilder checks that it is building a newer version, and the > promotion > interface only shows the latest version) help prevent lots of > mistakes, > particularly by people who are not too familiar with packaging. I > would not > want to change them. > > So, I understand what you are trying to do and why but I think the > current > rules do more good than harm. You seem to have a few options: (i) > only use > extras-devel once you are close to calling a new version stable and > are > unlikely to do any more updates to the previous version (you could > use a > private repository, like I still do for the daily builds from SVN > for my > software), (ii) use different package names (upgrades should work if > you are > using Conflicts: & Replaces:), (iii) hack with version numbers using > epochs. > > Let's see how many packages find this a problem before we look at > changing > anything. I strongly second Graham's point of view on this. Changing anything in the build system has a ripple effect on all packages and we can't afford a complete set of repository rebuilds at this point in time. Hopefully conforming to the current requirements of the build system, i.e. packages with a newer version get built, older packages do not, is not too burdensome. Jeremiah ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Getting package with lower version into extras-testing
On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 15:09 +0200, Tim Teulings wrote: > All well thoughtout, but one problem: If you later on find a bug in 0.5.x > and you will upload 0.5.y (where y>x) to get that fix into testing, at > least in extras-devel nobody will be able to download it, because the > application manager wil never show it. It will only and always show > 0.6-alphaX. And if you have 0.6.0 in extras-testing (where it possibly > stays for lets say one month) and in the mean time you promote your 0.5.y > fix (because it works), no tester will see it in the application manager > either (they will only see 0.6.0). They all would need to download and > install it manually to the device (and you have to support this downgrading > in your packages). Thanks for giving that special case. There indeed I see a problem. I don't think it would be a particular problem for me, but I can see, that it might be a problem for other (or even for me at some point). > No problem. Is it clearer now? Yes, it's clearer now. Thank you :) Also big thanks to Graham for the explanation and the tips with 'Conflicts' and 'Replaces'. I'll give it a try now. Let's see how it goes. Thanks! Conny ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Getting package with lower version into extras-testing
On Tuesday 13 October 2009 13:46:25 Cornelius Hald wrote: > Sorry to be so persistent, but I still don´t understand why I should > have two packages. You are probably right that the root cause of the problem is that we are using extras-devel for two different purposes: it is a test area for very early versions of packages as well an important step on the way for packages trying to get to the users. Sometime we may have to split that up. However, at the moment, your requirement is unusual. The current rules (autobuilder checks that it is building a newer version, and the promotion interface only shows the latest version) help prevent lots of mistakes, particularly by people who are not too familiar with packaging. I would not want to change them. So, I understand what you are trying to do and why but I think the current rules do more good than harm. You seem to have a few options: (i) only use extras-devel once you are close to calling a new version stable and are unlikely to do any more updates to the previous version (you could use a private repository, like I still do for the daily builds from SVN for my software), (ii) use different package names (upgrades should work if you are using Conflicts: & Replaces:), (iii) hack with version numbers using epochs. Let's see how many packages find this a problem before we look at changing anything. Graham ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Getting package with lower version into extras-testing
Hello! > Exactly. If I upload e.g. 0.5.6 (stable) to extras-devel where there is > already 0.6.0-alpha9 (unstable) the users still will get the unstable > version which is exactly what I want. In fact I don´t need to have the > stable version in extras-devel at all, but I have to put it there first > to be able to promote it to extras-testing. Correct. Currently to get to extras and extras testing you must for upload to extras-devel. > I never said I want to put buggy software into extras-testing. I want to > put stable software into extras-testing! OK. Does not change anything in the context of the discussion. > I think extras-devel is exactly for that. It´s the first step for a new > package. So unstable packages should go there. Right. > Now, once my 0.6-alphaX version will reach let´s say 0.6.0 and I > consider it stable, then I´ll promote it to extras-testing. There it > will replace the 0.5.x versions and testers can test it. Once they think > it´s stable, I´ll promote it to extras where it also will replace the > 0.5.x versions. [...] > In this way there is only on package and the users decides which version > he wants. If he has enabled extras-devel he´ll get the unstable version, > if he has enabled extras-testing he´ll get the testing version, and so > on. All well thoughtout, but one problem: If you later on find a bug in 0.5.x and you will upload 0.5.y (where y>x) to get that fix into testing, at least in extras-devel nobody will be able to download it, because the application manager wil never show it. It will only and always show 0.6-alphaX. And if you have 0.6.0 in extras-testing (where it possibly stays for lets say one month) and in the mean time you promote your 0.5.y fix (because it works), no tester will see it in the application manager either (they will only see 0.6.0). They all would need to download and install it manually to the device (and you have to support this downgrading in your packages). Btw., IMHO direct uploads to extras-testing for bug fixes will not fix this (likely suggestion to solve this). > I will go that way if it´s the way to go, but I would like to understand > why my way is wrong. I think it makes more sense to have only one [...] > Sorry to be so persistent, but I still don´t understand why I should > have two packages. No problem. Is it clearer now? -- Gruß... Tim ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Getting package with lower version into extras-testing
ext Cornelius Hald writes: > I will go that way if it´s the way to go, but I would like to understand > why my way is wrong. I think it makes more sense to have only one > package and to leave the definition on whether it is stable or not to > the repository which it is in. I don't think there is much wrong with this (except that maemo.org doesn't support it, as you have found out). However, using two separate package names for stable and unstable versions of your software doesn't push people completely into extras-devel only to try your next beta. People might be prepared to install a unstable version of your application, but they might not be prepared to enable extras-devel in general. > If I create a -stable and a -devel version I make it more difficult > and confusing for a user to upgrade from the unstable to the final > version. Well, you can just update the source of the old stable version to the new stable version, pretending that the -unstable packages do not exist at all. ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Getting package with lower version into extras-testing
On Tuesday 13 October 2009 13:21:25 Tim Teulings wrote: > I would suggest to give "next stable version but currenttly still buggy" a > special new package name like myapp-unstable or myapp6 (where 5 is the > current version) (and keep this version in extras-devel). This was already > suggested and sound much cleaner. Good suggestion. Keep the currently stable version as "conboy". If you want testers to have access to a new version, call it "conboy-unstable" (or conboy-testing or something). Both would be in extras-devel but only "conboy" would be in extras-testing and extras. Once you are happy that the unstable version is stable enough to be released to ordinary users, repackage it as "conboy" 0.6 (and make it replace conboy-testing 0.6). So conboy-unstable never makes it out of extras-devel. Graham ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Getting package with lower version into extras-testing
Tim Teulings wrote: > People do updates with the application manager on extras-devel. If there is > a package with multiple version in the repository, application manager will > only show and allow update to the packages with the highest version number. > A repository togetehr with the application manager does not work like a > file system. Also if a device has already downloaded a package version with > higher number, placing an package with lower version number will not result > in an update on the device. So why should one upload a package nobody will > ever see or get? Depending on upload and download time different things > will happen on the device. Exactly. If I upload e.g. 0.5.6 (stable) to extras-devel where there is already 0.6.0-alpha9 (unstable) the users still will get the unstable version which is exactly what I want. In fact I don´t need to have the stable version in extras-devel at all, but I have to put it there first to be able to promote it to extras-testing. > However you now clain that extras-devel is a staging repository for > extras-testing and extras where you want multiple packages version where > different package version go into different target repositories, so above > should be allowed. I would say: No. extras-testing is not a target > repository it is only a transitional repository where packages should be > placed because on wants them to get them into extras. So packages that are > placed into extras-testing should be of the kind "I think it is bug free, > you, too?" and not "I know it is buggy, just take a look at the future" (in > fact QA people will take a look at extras-testing and will test sofwtare > that is known to be unstable). I never said I want to put buggy software into extras-testing. I want to put stable software into extras-testing! Of course extras-testing is only a transitional repository and of course the package should move to extras after some testing. That is, why I would only promote the stable version from extras-devel to extras-testing and I would leave the unstable version in extras-devel. I think extras-devel is exactly for that. It´s the first step for a new package. So unstable packages should go there. Now, once my 0.6-alphaX version will reach let´s say 0.6.0 and I consider it stable, then I´ll promote it to extras-testing. There it will replace the 0.5.x versions and testers can test it. Once they think it´s stable, I´ll promote it to extras where it also will replace the 0.5.x versions. In this way there is only on package and the users decides which version he wants. If he has enabled extras-devel he´ll get the unstable version, if he has enabled extras-testing he´ll get the testing version, and so on. > I would suggest to give "next stable version but currenttly still buggy" a > special new package name like myapp-unstable or myapp6 (where 5 is the > current version) (and keep this version in extras-devel). This was already > suggested and sound much cleaner. I will go that way if it´s the way to go, but I would like to understand why my way is wrong. I think it makes more sense to have only one package and to leave the definition on whether it is stable or not to the repository which it is in. If I create a -stable and a -devel version I make it more difficult and confusing for a user to upgrade from the unstable to the final version. Sorry to be so persistent, but I still don´t understand why I should have two packages. Cheers! Conny ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Getting package with lower version into extras-testing
Graham Cobb wrote: > I think that the best way to support two ongoing streams (say, a stable > stream > and a testing stream) is to give them two different package names. This is > the way debian handles things like kde3 and kde4 or the various versions of > gcj. This is particularly easy in Maemo because the user doesn't need to see > the package name directly if you set a display name. > > So, I would create two new packages: conboy0.5 and conboy0.6 (or, if you > prefer, conboy-stable and conboy-testing). The display names would be > something like "Conboy (stable version)" and "Conboy (testing version)". > > You should specify Conflicts in the control file so that they can both > install > the same files (assuming that you don't plan to support having both installed > at the same time). Thanks Graham, I guess I´ll have to do it that way then. Only I still don´t really understand why. I mean, why is it not ok to just upload a package with a lower version number to extras-devel? I could then promote the stable one into extras-testing and the unstable one could remain in extras-devel. Having to use package names like conboy-stable and conboy-testing seems a bit odd to me. We already got stable and unstable repositories, so why not just move stable versions to the stable repository and leave unstable packages in the unstable repository? Probably I missed some important point, but right know I don´t see why it shouldn´t work like this. >> On the summit someone was giving me the tip that I could prepend '1:' to >> the version number. That way the autobuilder would think it's newer, but >> the version number which is shown would remain the same. > > No! Unless I am very confused, using epochs is not a solution! Once you use > an epoch, the version with the epoch is later than all versions without the > epoch. So, if you have built 1:0.5.6 you will have to use version number > 1:0.6.0 to build the 0.6 version. And if you do the same thing another day > you will have to increement the epochs again. That is not what the epoch > mechanism is designed for: it is designed to fix version numbering mistakes > or changes. Thanks for the clarification. I did it because I think (hope) that verison 0.5.6 will be the last update to the 0.5.x series and I just wanted to get it somehow through. Well, now I´ll have to live with the consequences ;) > That sounds like a bug in the promotion interface: it should handle epochs > correctly. I´ll file a bug then. Thanks! Conny ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Getting package with lower version into extras-testing
Hallo! > Thanks Graham, I guess I´ll have to do it that way then. Only I still > don´t really understand why. I mean, why is it not ok to just upload a > package with a lower version number to extras-devel? I could then > promote the stable one into extras-testing and the unstable one could > remain in extras-devel. People do updates with the application manager on extras-devel. If there is a package with multiple version in the repository, application manager will only show and allow update to the packages with the highest version number. A repository togetehr with the application manager does not work like a file system. Also if a device has already downloaded a package version with higher number, placing an package with lower version number will not result in an update on the device. So why should one upload a package nobody will ever see or get? Depending on upload and download time different things will happen on the device. However you now clain that extras-devel is a staging repository for extras-testing and extras where you want multiple packages version where different package version go into different target repositories, so above should be allowed. I would say: No. extras-testing is not a target repository it is only a transitional repository where packages should be placed because on wants them to get them into extras. So packages that are placed into extras-testing should be of the kind "I think it is bug free, you, too?" and not "I know it is buggy, just take a look at the future" (in fact QA people will take a look at extras-testing and will test sofwtare that is known to be unstable). I would suggest to give "next stable version but currenttly still buggy" a special new package name like myapp-unstable or myapp6 (where 5 is the current version) (and keep this version in extras-devel). This was already suggested and sound much cleaner. -- Gruß... Tim ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Getting package with lower version into extras-testing
On Monday 12 October 2009 20:27:45 Cornelius Hald wrote: > Now I have an update to the stable version with the version number > 0.5.6. The extras autobuilder rejects this package because there is > already a package with a higher version number in extras-devel. I think that the best way to support two ongoing streams (say, a stable stream and a testing stream) is to give them two different package names. This is the way debian handles things like kde3 and kde4 or the various versions of gcj. This is particularly easy in Maemo because the user doesn't need to see the package name directly if you set a display name. So, I would create two new packages: conboy0.5 and conboy0.6 (or, if you prefer, conboy-stable and conboy-testing). The display names would be something like "Conboy (stable version)" and "Conboy (testing version)". You should specify Conflicts in the control file so that they can both install the same files (assuming that you don't plan to support having both installed at the same time). > On the summit someone was giving me the tip that I could prepend '1:' to > the version number. That way the autobuilder would think it's newer, but > the version number which is shown would remain the same. No! Unless I am very confused, using epochs is not a solution! Once you use an epoch, the version with the epoch is later than all versions without the epoch. So, if you have built 1:0.5.6 you will have to use version number 1:0.6.0 to build the 0.6 version. And if you do the same thing another day you will have to increement the epochs again. That is not what the epoch mechanism is designed for: it is designed to fix version numbering mistakes or changes. > So I changed the version number of my stable update to 1:0.5.6. Now the > autobuilder did accept and build it. And it is available in > extras-devel. The problem now seems to be that the web frontend for the > promotion to extras-testing does it's own version number comparison. It > still thinks that 0.6.0-alpha9 is the most recent version. So I cannot > promote 1:0.5.6 to extras-testing. That sounds like a bug in the promotion interface: it should handle epochs correctly. Graham ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Getting package with lower version into extras-testing
Hi, I think I could need some more packaging/autobuilder help. There is the following situation: Conboy 0.5.4 in extras Conboy 0.5.5 in extras-testing Conboy 0.6.0-alpha9 in extras-devel Now I have an update to the stable version with the version number 0.5.6. The extras autobuilder rejects this package because there is already a package with a higher version number in extras-devel. On the summit someone was giving me the tip that I could prepend '1:' to the version number. That way the autobuilder would think it's newer, but the version number which is shown would remain the same. So I changed the version number of my stable update to 1:0.5.6. Now the autobuilder did accept and build it. And it is available in extras-devel. The problem now seems to be that the web frontend for the promotion to extras-testing does it's own version number comparison. It still thinks that 0.6.0-alpha9 is the most recent version. So I cannot promote 1:0.5.6 to extras-testing. How can I get version 0.5.6 into extras-testing? Shouldn't it just be possible to uploaded files with lower version number as long as the particular number does not yet exist? Some help would really be nice :) Thanks! Conny ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
