meta-python Dunfell branch maintenance

meta-python Dunfell branch maintenance

[akuster]

Hello all,

I have notice many meta-python3 recipes are having their .inc files
being consolidated. I am considering backporting those consolidations
that are bug fix only so that maintenance moving forward is easier.

Any concerns from the community on taking that route where  appropriate?

regards,
Armin

Re: [oe] meta-python Dunfell branch maintenance

[Adrian Bunk]

On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 07:59:13AM -0700, akuster wrote:
> Hello all,
> 
> I have notice many meta-python3 recipes are having their .inc files
> being consolidated. I am considering backporting those consolidations
> that are bug fix only

Those consolidations can never be "bug fix only" - part of a recipe in
an .inc file is not a bug.

> so that maintenance moving forward is easier.
> 
> Any concerns from the community on taking that route where  appropriate?

I wouldn't see it appropriate for a stable branch in most cases.

If you are backporting other changes for a recipe that were done in 
master on top of such a change this approach sounds like an option, but 
in the normal case that the recipe is never touched for other reasons in 
a stable branch I do not see the benefits of making such unnecessary changes.

> regards,
> Armin

cu
Adrian

Re: [oe] meta-python Dunfell branch maintenance

[Khem Raj]

On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 8:20 AM Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 07:59:13AM -0700, akuster wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I have notice many meta-python3 recipes are having their .inc files
> > being consolidated. I am considering backporting those consolidations
> > that are bug fix only
>
> Those consolidations can never be "bug fix only" - part of a recipe in
> an .inc file is not a bug.
>
> > so that maintenance moving forward is easier.
> >
> > Any concerns from the community on taking that route where  appropriate?
>
> I wouldn't see it appropriate for a stable branch in most cases.
>
> If you are backporting other changes for a recipe that were done in
> master on top of such a change this approach sounds like an option, but
> in the normal case that the recipe is never touched for other reasons in
> a stable branch I do not see the benefits of making such unnecessary changes.
>

I reckon that this would make it easy to maintain then in the future,
so the question is do
we do this now or do we wait until a bug fix is required on dunfell,
at that time the
the effort would be to do both. If its moving code around without
other changes then it's a trivial fix
I would leave it up to maintainer's discretion if it makes their work
easier, it's perhaps fine to
cherry-pick the easy ones.

> > regards,
> > Armin
>
> cu
> Adrian
>