[debhelper-devel] Some thoughts about named compat level and version numbers

[gregor herrmann]

On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 00:29:37 +0200, Axel Beckert wrote:

> > > Wouldn't it make sense to have a named compat level which always
> > > refers to the most recent recommended or stable (is there a
> > > difference?) level? I.e. introducing a named level "stable",
> > > "recommended" or "default" which now is equivalent to "10" (and would
> > > have been equivalent to "9" until very recently) and more or less
> > > corresponds to debhelper's major version...
> > I have considered that and I am slightly conflicted on it.
> Indeed, I'm aware of potential drawbacks of that idea. That's why I'd
> like to see it discussed. :-)

I think that's an interesting idea; and I also don't know yet if I
see more advantages or more dangers :)
 
> My motiviation is mostly teams maintaining a huge bunch of packages
> working all mostly the same way (namely the Debian Perl Team). So
> instead of bumping the compat version every time lintian complains
> about not being the "recommended" version, they would put in "stable"
> and then just fix those packages properly which fail.

Right, but that wouldn't change the required version in d/control /
Build-Depends.
 
> I though must admit, that I have no idea if really that much packages
> would continue to build properly or if the fallout would be more work
> than a mass-commit over a few thousand packages. Nor have I talked
> with the rest of the team about it. But the thought came, because I
> saw one big mass-commit before us, switching all packages in git to
> compat level 10 as soon as lintian argues about compat level 9 being
> used.

IIRC we never did a mass change of debhelper compat level so far.
Mostly because historically we needed all kind of weird versions for
all kinds of features (that's again d/control, not d/compat);
currently the situation is simpler. And I guess also because we
didn't want to risk breakage.
 
> > Personally though, I am inclined to see how well this feature is adopted
> > before investing a lot of time.
> Good point. Using "beta-tester" to see if it might make sense to offer
> further named comapt levels (maybe even "lowest-supported" ;-) sounds
> like a good plan.

Ack, makes sense to me as well.
 

Cheers,
gregor

-- 
 .''`.  Homepage https://info.comodo.priv.at/ - OpenPGP key 0xBB3A68018649AA06
 : :' : Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, and developer -  https://www.debian.org/
 `. `'  Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe
   `-   NP: Elliott Sharp: Caffiend
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 931 bytes
Desc: Digital Signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debhelper-devel/attachments/20160912/848fdc82/attachment-0001.sig>