 |
 |
Thanks Frossie for your answer. Nevertheless is seems not all our third-party dependencies are tagged, see mysql proxy in https://sw.lsstcorp.org/eupspkg/tags/qserv_latest.list: mysqlproxy generic 0.8.2+12 Is it normal? Third option looks nice, whereas coud you please clarify what is an "alphabetic tags" and also this part:"you lose the 2015_11 tag from the manifest "? Thanks :-) Fabrice On 12/07/2015 04:42 PM, Frossie Economou wrote: > > So the problem is that if we don’t git-tag the dependencies, there is > no way to reproduce a build without eups in the future, ever. I’m > actually reluctant to give that up. > > > Right now if we git-tag, eups picks them up as versions. There is a PR > open in EUPS to do the opposite, but then that means that any tags > that I make (eg. the weeklies) will also get dropped.The problem is > that some people care about the eups versions being consistent and > some people want them to read like the initial versions and others > don’t use them at all. > > > There is no obvious solution to this problem that keeps everybody > happy. So to recap, the options are: > > > (a) I don’t git-tag your externals. You can never reproduce a release > state without EUPS. > > > (b) The current situation (I git-tag your externals and the manifest > shows your tag for externals - the git tags will still show you the > “real” version) > > > (c) we switch to the new version of eups that ignores alphabetic tags, > I tag your release with an alphabetic tag but then you lose the > 2015_11 tag from the manifest > > > Open to opinions. I can call into your Wed meeting if you like. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Fabrice Jammes <[log in to unmask]> > <mailto:[log in to unmask]> > Date: December 5, 2015 at 15:10:37 > To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]> <mailto:[log in to unmask]> > CC: qserv-l <[log in to unmask]> <mailto:[log in to unmask]> > Subject: About dependency version numbers > > > Hi Frossie, > > > > During the latest Qserv release, some Qserv third-party dependencies > version number > > have been set to 2015_11.O. Here's the list below: > > > > (extract of https://sw.lsstcorp.org/eupspkg/tags/qserv_latest.list) > > > > xrootd generic 2015_11.0 > > boost generic 2015_11.0 > > protobuf generic 2015_11.0 > > sconsUtils generic 2015_11.0 > > > > > > Please note that for these dependencies, I think we would like to > keep their "real" version > > number, so that we can easilly know which version of them we are using. > > On the other hand, I think that it is ok to use 2015_11.0 tag for > packets developed by Qserv > > team (except xrootd which has its own version numbers), like you're > doing now. > > > > So, for the next release, could we please switch back to > "real"/previous version number > > for the 4 packages listed above? Of course, if Qserv team also agree > with that. > > > > I've build a Docker image from the release you've done, and it seems > fine (except that > > I had to check that xrootd 2015_11.0 was also 4.3.0.rc4a.lsst1 ;-)). > > Thanks again for packaging the release, this is a complex task and > it help a lot that you > > can do it on the Square side :-) > > > > Have a nice day, > > > > Fabrice > > > > -- > Frossie Economou > Science Quality and Reliability Engineering (SQuaRE) > Large Synoptic Survey Telescope > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list > > To unsubscribe from the QSERV-L list, click the following link: > https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=QSERV-L&A=1 > ######################################################################## Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list To unsubscribe from the QSERV-L list, click the following link: https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=QSERV-L&A=1