Code review comment for lp:~philip-peitsch/quickly/multiple-distros

Revision history for this message
Didier Roche-Tolomelli (didrocks) wrote :

So, I looked at your change and I really like your work there about factoring the versioning scheme :)
Also the testsuite is very great and that motive me to expand it (it just should be in <template_directory>/test/, but that's a detail ;)

Now, about the multi distro thing, I think there is a little misconception, let me explain how it works.

In ubuntu, for instance, let's say you release 0.2-0ubuntu1 in karmic. If you don't change it, 0.2-0ubuntu1 will be rebuild on lucid (and during the dist-upgrade, it will fetch and download it). There is no need for ~<distrib> or other stuff like that which should be used at last resort (for corner case that one developer won't encounter on his/her own, normally).
Now, if a new version is released, we can as well backport to previous version, like 0.2.1-0ubuntu1 for instance.

And I'm sure you will tell me now that "oh, but it's failing in my ppa when I try to reupload the same version, just changing the distro in debian/changelog". Yes, but…

That's because uploading most time the same version is wrong wrong wrong (wrong? ;)). You should just ask for a rebuild against another version of the distribution.

- "Oh sweet, how can I do that?"
- "No pb son, just head to copy, select 'This' as destination ppa and ask for a rebuild against another release".
- "That was quite hidden"
- "Right"
- "So, what about providing a command to do that for the user?"
- "That's an excellent idea, but there is nothing in the API at the moment to due that"
- "So, for Quickly 0.6?"
- "yeah, let's say that"

So, what do you think about that plan? With that, we don't clutter the versionning and it's working better.

But I'm still very very interested in the other part of the patch which refactors and makes a testsuite from the versionning scheme and autobumping. I would just rename "parse_version" to "bump_version" or "parse_and_bump_version" to show that we are returning a new value.

Tell me what do you think about that plan and resubmit this part?

PS: sorry, I'm a little bit ill now and that's why some part are just on the fun side ;)

review: Needs Resubmitting

« Back to merge proposal