Print

---

YES please, thanks!

I'm still quite consistently confused about:

- exactly how many flavors of tags and labels there are among the 
various tools
- what the intended semantics each of these is
- what the actual current (ab)uses of each of these are
- where and how these are seen within the tools, and of the things that 
may be seen, which are which
- which things are done automatically
- etc.

Clues very gladly accepted!

     --FritzM.

On 12/07/2015 10:32 AM, Frossie Economou wrote:
>
> Okay I think I will write this up and then it will make more sense 
> (hopefully)
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fabrice Jammes <[log in to unmask]> 
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Date: December 7, 2015 at 10:45:33
> To: Frossie Economou <[log in to unmask]> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>, 
> Fabrice Jammes <[log in to unmask]> 
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> CC: qserv-l <[log in to unmask]> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: [QSERV-L] About dependency version numbers
>
> > 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
> > >
> > > Date: December 5, 2015 at 15:10:37
> > > To: [log in to unmask]
> > > CC: qserv-l
> > > 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
> > >
> >
> >
>
> -- 
> 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