Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

gnomechecker: Don't consider 3.odd unstable #435

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

A6GibKm
Copy link
Contributor

@A6GibKm A6GibKm commented Jul 19, 2024

There is only a handful of modules using the older version scheming.

The version scheme consisted declaring a release with numbering 3.x stable if 3 was even and odd otherwise. This versioning scheme was dropped by most modules around GNOME 40.

For context, this causes multiple false positives with modules like tracker who have a major version equal to three but do not follow the old numbering scheme.

cc @fosero, @ebassi.

There is only a handful of modules using the older version scheming.

The version scheme consisted declaring a release with numbering 3.x
stable if 3 was even and odd otherwise. This versioning scheme was
dropped by most modules around GNOME 40.
@wjt
Copy link
Contributor

wjt commented Jul 19, 2024

As it stands, for e.g. tracker you can set stable-only to false and receive updates.

But with this proposed change, apps that use modules that do follow the minor-odd-is-unstable convention have no way to ignore unstable releases. My clone of all of Flathub is a bit out of date but one example is glibmm and friends which are used by a fair number of apps.

@A6GibKm
Copy link
Contributor Author

A6GibKm commented Jul 19, 2024

As it stands, for e.g. tracker you can set stable-only to false and receive updates.

But with this proposed change, apps that use modules that do follow the minor-odd-is-unstable convention have no way to ignore unstable releases. My clone of all of Flathub is a bit out of date but one example is glibmm and friends which are used by a fair number of apps.

I need to debug this further, at this point every single we have to flip around the value of stable-only to fix this issue.

@wjt
Copy link
Contributor

wjt commented Jul 19, 2024

Maybe a new version-scheme property with string values e.g. odd-minor-is-unstable or alpha-beta-rc-tags (just ideas off the top of my head) defaulting to the newer model. Then when tracking a project that does use the old scheme the odd-minor-is-unstable mode could be enabled but the default would work for the prevailing convention.

@wjt
Copy link
Contributor

wjt commented Jul 19, 2024

It would be even better if there were something in the GNOME release "API" that could be used to determine what the latest stable/unstable version is of a project and/or whether any given release is stable or not, rather than matching on version numbers, but I don't think there is :(

@A6GibKm
Copy link
Contributor Author

A6GibKm commented Jul 19, 2024

There is not, and then again, the modules that didn't upgrade to the newer version schedule last time are even less likely to migrate to this new api.

@wjt
Copy link
Contributor

wjt commented Aug 6, 2024

Maybe a new version-scheme property with string values e.g. odd-minor-is-unstable or alpha-beta-rc-tags (just ideas off the top of my head) defaulting to the newer model. Then when tracking a project that does use the old scheme the odd-minor-is-unstable mode could be enabled but the default would work for the prevailing convention.

See #436 for a request to adjust the current rules and an example of a module that uses the older scheme: VTE.

@A6GibKm
Copy link
Contributor Author

A6GibKm commented Aug 6, 2024

Thanks for the link. With the "older scheme" I refer to packages with a major version of 3 (and using odd/even to denote stability).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants