[packman] PMBS - quo vadis?

Olaf Hering olaf at aepfle.de
Fri Feb 24 11:36:11 CET 2017

Am Fri, 24 Feb 2017 11:09:42 +0100
schrieb Manfred Hollstein <manfred.h at gmx.net>:

> Indeed! Another example why the current approach to rely on some
> packages being provided by Factory first is kodi-17.

This is more an issue with the workflow.

Using 'osc bco Multimedia kodi' would have shown the issue right away.
There is no need to rush anything in. If a required library comes from
OBS or PMBS does not matter much. It has to be decided on a
case-by-case base how to satisfy the requirements. In case of libcec we
should just have waited until it appears in TW. In case of the recent
ABI change in libbluray it was clear that certain changes can not be
done globally.

> And when packages get removed, again, this needs some way of
> communication, potentially with reasons included and hints what should
> be used instead - this can be currently seen on openSUSE_Leap_42.1
> where several gstreamer related packages (0_10 version) either would
> need to get downgraded to those versions from OBS, or they don't even
> exist anymore (like libaudio2 or libslv2), but are still required by
> other packages (like MPlayer2).

I think MPlayer2 was dropped. Installed but orphaned packages are hard
to handle.

In the end I think the swipe should have been done with publish
disabled until everything is in state "succeeded" again.

Also it would be helpful if the email setup would work properly. Only a
subset of the submit_request emails are sent.

And perhaps each mail should be mirrored to this list to reach a wider
audience. But that may create too much noise for the "ordinary" lurker.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP
URL: <http://lists.links2linux.de/pipermail/packman/attachments/20170224/a747aabd/attachment.sig>

More information about the Packman mailing list