Policy when dependencies break on updates?

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

On 12.10.2008 08:55, David Timms wrote:
> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> On 08.10.2008 00:18, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>>> Since I'm new with packaging for a 3rd part repo I need to get
>>> certain things clear.
>> Note that the problems you outline can happen similarly within the 
>> Fedora repos as well.
>>
>>> What is the policy whenever Fedora pushes new packages to its updates
>>> repo and that breaks package dependencies of rpmfusion?
>> There are no real policies that handle this situation except "that 
>> should not happen and hence packagers should do everything to prevent 
>> that from happening".
> For the average joe using the gui tools, ie package kit, and it's update 
> notifier, I think it works out nicely enough:
> - you have 10 security and 6 updates available.
> - update me
> - downloads, tests, updates with skip-broken capability, leaving only 
> the broken ones still outstanding.
> - when the metadata is checked again, joe does get told again about the 
> outstanding update, but the update attempt again informs of missing or 
> incomplete package.
> 
> The last bit could be a bit annoying, and the process holds off updating 
> that {potential security} issue until the package becomes available.
> 
> Are there scripts available eg from fedora that could be used by 
> rpmfusion to create a list of broken packages, aka fedora's, and 
> automatically email the maintainer, as well as adding to the package 
> creation report? The sooner s/he knows about the issue, the sooner a 
> fix or rebuild can be requested.

mschwendt ran the dep-checker scripts a few weeks ago (see archives). 
Xavier afaik is working on setting those up properly, to make sure they 
run with each of our pushes.

> How common is it that a simple bump, build and push is all that is needed ?

 From my experience from livna: Not that common; most of the more then a 
bump is needed.

Cu
knurd