[packman] rebuilding gstreamer every day?

[Richard Brown]

On 19 June 2016 at 16:41, Dave Plater <davejplater at gmail.com> wrote:
>> The pkg in multimedia:libs is about one hundred, thousand, million
>> times more at risk of being broken than the pkg in Factory
>
> Not if it's well maintained

There is _NO SUCH THING_ as a well maintained Devel Project.

https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Factory_development_model

They EXIST to be where things are put together, broken and ultimately
fixed before being submitted to Factory for testing into Tumbleweed

A Devel Project which doesn't break from time to time is not doing
it's job properly.

>>
>> Because it's a devel project, where packages are MEANT to be broken
>> from time to time, meanwhile we KNOW the ffmpeg packages in Factory
>> work as they get tested in openQA as part of the VLC testing.
>>
>> I've said it before and I'll say it again Packman building against
>> multimedia:libs has always been silly
>
> Once Packman packages weren't linked and that resulted in many
> problems with incompatible libraries and out of sync maintenance.

I have no problem with linking, but link to the right thing for petes sake

ffmpeg in Packman is linked to openSUSE.org:multimedia:libs

This means it is version 3.0.2

In Tumbleweed ffmpeg is 2.8.6

In Leap ffmpeg is 2.8.6

In Leap 42.2 ffmpeg is 2.8.6

End result: Any Packman user is now forced to upgrade ffmpeg and
potentially ffmpeg related packages, including many multimedia
applications, to the versions in packman to a version of ffmpeg which
is UNTESTED and NOT SUPPORTED by the openSUSE Project (yet)

In short, this is dangerous, wrong, stupid and downright idiotic.. and
I'm being polite and holding back what i really think about it.

At the very LEAST ffmpeg in Packman should be linked to Factory/Tumbleweed

Packman for Leap should be linked to the version in Leap, so that
users do not have to suffer needless risk upgrading their packages.

> Packman is a safe way for users to get the newest packages, especially
> Leap users because it rarely gets new packages. It's a pity somebody
> doesn't donate some extra server power to Packman to speed up the
> build cycle. Maintaining the Packman packages in multimedia apps and
> libs has taken away the old volatility that used to come from Packman.
> It's a far better option to enabling multiple obs repositories for Leap.

No, Packman is not a safe way and this thread is sadly yet another
example of packman maintainers ignoring sound advice from seasoned
packagers who know what they're talking about.

And I'm not really talking about myself, you can ignore me all you
want, but Bjorn is an expert on all things packaging and OBS,
especially when it comes to large projects, it's downright crazy that
his good advice appears to be ignored.

Just as Tomas Chvatal's has been ignored on this list repeatedly.

Please guys, I've been a long supporter of Packman, even running
several servers for pmbs before I changed employer, so not erode my
goodwill and poison my soft spot for your efforts by stubbornly
sticking to your guns and risking the smooth operation of Tumbleweed
and Leap users in the process.

Please link your packages more appropriately.
Please do whatever you can to avoid unnecessary drift between Packman
and the distributions for which you are building Packman for.
Please rebuild="direct"

and Please listen to guys like Bjorn and Tomas when they give advice,
they know what they're talking about

- Richard
  http://rootco.de