Re: [PATCH] libcomps: put PV in filename

[Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2372 bytes --]

On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 10:32:07AM +0000, Burton, Ross wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 at 10:20, Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com> wrote:
> > http fetcher won't (usually) fetch different version just by changing 1
> > variable inside the recipe and vice versa, renaming the recipe won't
> > fetch different SRCREV with git.
> 
> Sure it will.  gcc_http.bb sets PV=8.3.0 in the recipe, and SRC_URI
> uses ${PV}.  The only catch is that http fetches have a secondary
> layer of transport checksums that git doesn't have.

I'm sorry, that's not what I meant.

git fetcher fetches whatever SRCREV is defined in the recipe, no matter
what PV says, I've seen enough recipe upgrades which just renamed the
recipe to have new version in filename updating SRCREV and even claimed
that the upgrade was properly tested, because nothing got broken :).

In webOS we got a bit further and PV+SRCREV are defined in one variable
WEBOS_VERSION and do_fetch qa check tests that the SRCREV points to
matching annotated version tag in the component.

> > If someone wants to update SRCREV in libcoms to be 10 commits behind
> > 0.1.10, is he expected to rename the recipe back to libcomps_git.bb and
> > re-add the PV variable (with new +git${SRCPV} suffix)?
> 
> Yes.  The recipe ships a release.  If the recipe is changed from
> shipping a tested and maintainer approved release to a git snapshot,
> that definitely should not be trivial.

Next time someone needs to include few bugfixes from stable branch
included just after the release, should he update the SRCREV or add them
as .patch files?

> > I got used to "+git${SRCPV}" being dropped when the SRCREV matches
> > exactly the git tag, but renaming the recipe and removing the PV seems
> > too much, what is the benefit of doing that? It's not for clarity or
> > easier maintenance (at least for me), because PV next to SRCREV makes
> > much more sense to me (and helps people not to forget updating both at
> > the same time).
> 
> For clarity and consistency: by convention recipes that ship releases
> put the PV in the filename.

FWIW: in webOS we don't use any version in filename, most recipes are
called just PN.bb and it works fine as well for us, less renames and
version consistently defined inside the recipes.

-- 
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa     jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 201 bytes --]