On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 05:31:34PM +0200, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 12:21 -0300, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto wrote:
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 4:12 AM, Ray Rashif <schiv@archlinux.org> wrote:
On 1 April 2011 08:12, Oon-Ee Ng <ngoonee.talk@gmail.com> wrote:
I've seen (in the past) various packages on the AUR which jumped by 3 or 4 pkgrels in a very short period of time. Sometimes it happens like this:-
1. Maintainer changes something and breaks the package with pkgrel=2 2. Bug reported on comments. Maintainer reverts changand makes pkgrel=3
It's really very simple - you only need to remember this:
Whenever the resulting binary changes (in an important way) for the user, you bump pkgrel.
Examples:
* Changing pkgdesc -> do NOT bump (unless it's severely wrong or something)
* Changing deps -> bump
* Changing makedeps -> do NOT bump, ever
* Changing optdeps -> do NOT bump (unless very important functionality provided)
* Changing build stuff (i.e changing PKGBUILD but no change to resulting binary) -> do NOT bump
Are you sure about that? I would bump pkgrel in all your examples, except the first. Even though they may not change the resulting binary, they change how they are built. I always thought of pkgrel as a way to differentiate between versions of PKGBUILDs.
a Makedep isn't that important so i wouldn't bump there, just like the build stuff. And if someone used ABS the makedep fix would be already there in svn ;)
-- Jelle van der Waa
A change in makedeps might fix a broken build, or it might enable a new feature that's conditionally linked in based on the presence of the dep. Definitely seems worthy of a pkgrel bump. dave