libmtp soname change breakage (was: Re: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras - 2007-02-07)

[Linus Walleij]

On Wed, 7 Feb 2007, Ville Skyttä wrote:

> Linus, was the soname change of libmtp announced somewhere in public
> beforehand?

If Bugzilla counts as public, yes:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221114

Aurelien Bompard (Amarok maintainer) triggered libmtp upgrade here by 
explicit request at 2007-02-06 16:19 EST.

However this reminds me about the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy where 
intergalactic highway constructions claim the destruction of the earth was 
announced in obscucre places before taking place, so "noone should be 
upset about it". I do understand that not every living person reads all 
bugzilla tickets, so looking back we should have brought this to the devel 
list too, since Amarok is such a popular package :-/

I'm sorry it ended up like this, even though we discussed it for two 
months... :-(

(The other dependency, gnomad2, is indeed obscure so doesn't cause much 
trouble I guess.)

Next time we will bring it more public, so someone can say "no" for us or 
find a better way.

>  Why was it necessary push the update to non-devel distros?

The 0.1.3 supports very many devices not supported by the previous 
version, so users consider it a bug.

> Apologies if I missed the announcement, but based on the above list of
> breakage I'm not alone even within Fedora maintainers, let alone elsewhere.

The packages were intended to be pushed out alongside each other, I built 
libmtp and I instructed gauret (Amarok maintainer) to rebuild and built 
gnomad2 immediately afterwards, however the build of libmtp was pushed 
before our builds were done.

The actual question here is how do we coordinate package builds with 
pushing of builds in a good way? What we want to do is group three 
packages (libmtp, gnomad2, amarok) and not push any one of them until all 
three are built. This would totally solve this kind of nasty problems.

Linus