Naming scheme of fis-gtm binary packages (Was: Bug#1009900: fis-gtm: Multiple CVEs in fis-gtm)
- To: "Shah, Amul" <Amul.Shah@fisglobal.com>, Debian Med Project List <debian-med@lists.debian.org>
- Subject: Naming scheme of fis-gtm binary packages (Was: Bug#1009900: fis-gtm: Multiple CVEs in fis-gtm)
- From: Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu>
- Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2022 10:44:44 +0200
- Message-id: <Yqw+/H/WUnFuuP1D@an3as.eu>
- In-reply-to: <DB9PR08MB655538006C985A7861C79EBFEBAC9@DB9PR08MB6555.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
- References: <165044961150.1709.8733518506483197341.reportbug@debian-sid.codehelp> <YmBYKz8qgOsQuCrT@an3as.eu> <DB9PR08MB6555C5C7C542C763CECC8556EBF59@DB9PR08MB6555.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <20220421075051.52683ca8@felix.codehelp> <DB9PR08MB6555A6BD2206A7823EE541B5EBA79@DB9PR08MB6555.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <DB9PR08MB6555B218918953899F48DE85EBAD9@DB9PR08MB6555.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <Yqr2jFgsgvjWwrBj@an3as.eu> <DB9PR08MB6555030F1A128B001550FF3AEBAC9@DB9PR08MB6555.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <Yqs6jbUUJ9P3pG8V@an3as.eu> <DB9PR08MB655538006C985A7861C79EBFEBAC9@DB9PR08MB6555.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
Hi Amul,
Am Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 05:58:54PM +0000 schrieb Shah, Amul:
> > Please reconsider the "add any minor version bump leads to a new binary
> > file name" strategy. This means that fis-gtm always needs to pass the
> > Debian new queue which always means that there is a hardly predictable
> > delay when the package will reach the distribution.
>
> Could you remind me about what we are doing to cause this problem? Is it the installation path?
>
> Or did you mean the below situation where there are two possible GT.M versions?
> > aptitude search fis-gtm
> p fis-gtm - metapackage for the latest version of FIS-GT.M database
> i fis-gtm-6.3-002 - package for FIS-GT.M database
> p fis-gtm-6.3-014 - package for FIS-GT.M database
We (rather you, Bashkar and Luis Ibanez) decided to create a new binary
package name for any mikro fis-gtm release to enable co-installation of
all those packages. I'm personally not convinced, that any single minor
version bump needs to be installed on a typical Debian installation.
This I would rather go with binary package names like fis-gtm-6.3 or
fis-gtm-7.0 no matter whether what mikro version "-002" currently - may
be "-003" next etc. the package is featuring.
However, I do not know anything about fis-gtm and its compatibility between
micro versions - so may be I'm just on the wrong track while looking from
a Debian packaging perspective. My perspective is that I'm just scared
by uploading to the new queue for every single micro version bump which
always is causing unpredictable delays until the package gets accepted in
unstable.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: