xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: xfsprogs/xfsdump release process

To: Mike Frysinger <vapier@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: xfsprogs/xfsdump release process
From: Felix Blyakher <felixb@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 10:38:55 -0600
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "xfs-oss" <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <200902231125.44076.vapier@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <200902221348.51905.vapier@xxxxxxxxxx> <20090223072207.GA4112@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <DCA2D97E-F9A4-4A9E-BC39-CFFF1D0AD2CD@xxxxxxx> <200902231125.44076.vapier@xxxxxxxxxx>

On Feb 23, 2009, at 10:25 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:

On Monday 23 February 2009 11:10:44 Felix Blyakher wrote:
On Feb 23, 2009, at 1:22 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 11:00:45PM -0600, Felix Blyakher wrote:
Mike, you're absolutely right here. The config files got into the
dmapi tarball by mistake, sorry for this. I verified that neither
xfsprogs nor xfsdump have any extra files. New (clean) dmapi tarball
will be on the oss site shortly.

Please don't overwrite already uploaded tarballs. Let's make a 2.2.10
release instead.  We might just use the Makepkgs script for it after
fixing it.  See the question and patch on the list for xfsprogs for
that, haven't checked dmapi works right yet.

Didn't think that removing the unneeded files from the package
justifies the version bump. It doesn't change anything for people
who already downloaded unclean dmapi tarballs.
Though, if opinion on this matter is that strong, I'd definitely
bump the version, and will use updated Makepkgs.

the problem is for people (like Gentoo) who already fetched the tarball, hashed it, and posted the resulting URL/hash to their packaging systems ...

OK, that's definitely convincing.

Felix

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>