Mailing List Archive: Maemo: Developers

Upgrade Description and Package Interface fun

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

eopage at byu

Nov 16, 2009, 7:32 PM

Post #1 of 4 (594 views)
Permalink

Upgrade Description and Package Interface fun

After getting some comments about this for Gonvert, I thought I'd
finally look into this issue, see:
http://maemo.org/packages/package_instance/view/fremantle_extras-testing_free_armel/gonvert/0.9.0-4

So I have 4 packages in the Fremantle Package interface
http://maemo.org/packages/view/dialcentral/
http://maemo.org/packages/view/ejpi/
http://maemo.org/packages/view/gonvert/
http://maemo.org/packages/view/quicknote/

Dialcentral's page has a description, the others' pages have the most
recent package's Maemo-Upgrade-Description. Similar build script
wrapping the same version of py2deb (a custom one I run). I've
checked the source package's control files and the binary package's
control files. To me, it all looks good. I've included the source
control files for reference.

Anyone know what is going on? Is something wrong in the formatting of
my control files? Is this some kind of Package Interface bug?

Thanks
Ed Page
(epage)

Attachments:

dialcentral-control (3.45 KB)

ejpi-control (1.61 KB)

gonvert-control (3.23 KB)

martin.grimme at gmail

Nov 16, 2009, 11:11 PM

Post #2 of 4 (558 views)
Permalink

Re: Upgrade Description and Package Interface fun [In reply to]

Hi,

could this be

https://bugs.maemo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6187

?

As long as this bug exists, I won't use the upgrade description field anymore.

Martin

2009/11/17, Edward Page <eopage [at] byu>:
> After getting some comments about this for Gonvert, I thought I'd
> finally look into this issue, see:
> http://maemo.org/packages/package_instance/view/fremantle_extras-testing_free_armel/gonvert/0.9.0-4
>
> So I have 4 packages in the Fremantle Package interface
> http://maemo.org/packages/view/dialcentral/
> http://maemo.org/packages/view/ejpi/
> http://maemo.org/packages/view/gonvert/
> http://maemo.org/packages/view/quicknote/
>
> Dialcentral's page has a description, the others' pages have the most
> recent package's Maemo-Upgrade-Description. Similar build script
> wrapping the same version of py2deb (a custom one I run). I've
> checked the source package's control files and the binary package's
> control files. To me, it all looks good. I've included the source
> control files for reference.
>
> Anyone know what is going on? Is something wrong in the formatting of
> my control files? Is this some kind of Package Interface bug?
>
> Thanks
> Ed Page
> (epage)
>
_______________________________________________
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers [at] maemo
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers

g+770 at cobb

Nov 18, 2009, 7:23 AM

Post #3 of 4 (545 views)
Permalink

Re: Upgrade Description and Package Interface fun [In reply to]

On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 08:11:35AM +0100, Martin Grimme wrote:
> https://bugs.maemo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6187
>
> ?
>
> As long as this bug exists, I won't use the upgrade description field anymore.

It is a serious bug (nothing that happens in extras-testing should ever
affect the Downloads view which needs to be built from Extras only). But it
seems like a mistake not to use the upgrade description.

Packages which have a released version in Extras need to have an Upgrade
Description. I would tend to assume the bug will be fixed and create the
Upgrade Description to avod a tester making me down for not having an
Upgrade Description. While the bug exists you could always make sure the
Upgrade Description also contains enough information to tell someone who
does not have it installed what it does.

Graham
_______________________________________________
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers [at] maemo
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers

martin.grimme at gmail

Nov 18, 2009, 8:16 AM

Post #4 of 4 (527 views)
Permalink

Re: Upgrade Description and Package Interface fun [In reply to]

No, this is not an option IMHO, because the Upgrade Description would
tell about things not present in the current version in extras. This
only generates confusion.

As long as this critical bug exists, Upgrade Description must not be
considered mandatory for package updates in the extras-testing Q&A.
Hopefully this bug gets fixed, soon.

Martin

2009/11/18, Graham Cobb <g+770 [at] cobb>:
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 08:11:35AM +0100, Martin Grimme wrote:
>> https://bugs.maemo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6187
>>
>> ?
>>
>> As long as this bug exists, I won't use the upgrade description field
>> anymore.
>
> It is a serious bug (nothing that happens in extras-testing should ever
> affect the Downloads view which needs to be built from Extras only). But it
> seems like a mistake not to use the upgrade description.
>
> Packages which have a released version in Extras need to have an Upgrade
> Description. I would tend to assume the bug will be fixed and create the
> Upgrade Description to avod a tester making me down for not having an
> Upgrade Description. While the bug exists you could always make sure the
> Upgrade Description also contains enough information to tell someone who
> does not have it installed what it does.
>
> Graham
>
_______________________________________________
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers [at] maemo
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads