[suggest] per-Time-Piece package problem

Aaron Scamehorn aaron.scamehorn at cogcap.com
Tue Aug 22 16:38:05 CEST 2006


Dag Wieers wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Aug 2006, Aaron Scamehorn wrote:
>
>   
>> First, thanks for the work providing these packages.
>>
>> In the following package:
>> Name        : perl-Time-Piece              Relocations: (not
>> relocatable)
>> Version     : 2.00_01                           Vendor: Dag Apt
>> Repository, http://dag.wieers.com/apt/
>> Release     : 1.2.el4.rf                    Build Date: Sun Nov 27
>> 03:19:45 2005
>> Install Date: Wed Jul 26 15:20:35 2006      Build Host:
>> lisse.hasselt.wieers.com
>> Group       : Applications/CPAN             Source RPM:
>> perl-Time-Piece-2.00_01-1.2.el4.rf.src.rpm
>> Size        : 74071                            License: Artistic
>> Signature   : DSA/SHA1, Sun Nov 27 10:47:14 2005, Key ID
>> a20e52146b8d79e6
>> Packager    : Dries Verachtert <dries at ulyssis.org>
>> URL         : http://search.cpan.org/dist/Time-Piece/
>> Summary     : Object Oriented time objects
>> Description :
>> This module contains Object Oriented time objects.
>>
>>
>> According to the above modules webpage,
>> http://search.cpan.org/dist/Time-Piece/, Version 2.00_01 (and 2.00_00)
>> is a DEVELOPER RELEASE.  As such, there is a bug in Piece.pm,v 1.21.  I
>> will report this bug to the author of Time::Piece as well
>> (http://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=20743).
>>
>> Given that Version 2.00_01 is marked as DEVELOPER RELEASE, is it
>> possible for you to fall back to Time-Piece-1.09?
>>     
>
> Yes, this is clearly a problem. We should NOT (read: NEVER) package and 
> release developer releases, beta's or release candidates. Clearly if the 
> developers themselves are not releasing it as stable, who are we to decide 
> otherwise.
>
> There are of course exceptions to this rule, but only very limited ones.
> And certainly not any of the CPAN packages. (One that comes to mind is 
> mplayer, since they succeed in doing one release per decade or less :))
>
>  
>   
>> I composed this email sometime ago, and sent it directly to dag & dries.
>> I've since received a response from the maintainer of Time-Piece that
>> bug id 20743 is resolved.  The resolution is: "Resolving as I've
>> discontinued the 2.00 line and deleted from CPAN."
>>     
>
> And now the big problem is, how are we going to downgrade to 1.09.
> I hate to introduce an epoch and much rather remove the 2.00 and just 
> update the 1.09 package. That will require a manual downgrade by the 
> selected few who have this installed.
>
>   
Yes, I have already manually downgraded to the 1.09 version.  I agree 
that this is a better solution than introducing an epoch.

> Do you know what software requires this package, in order to have a better 
> understanding how many people are currently affected ?
>
>   
We use perl-Time-Piece in our internal software.  Specifically for 
parsing timestamps in log files.

I do not know of any other dependencies on perl-Time-Piece.
> Dries, do you know of any other packages (specifically perl-packages) 
> where you might have taken and build a developer release ?
>
>
> Kind regards,
> --   dag wieers,  dag at wieers.com,  http://dag.wieers.com/   --
> [all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power]
>   




More information about the users mailing list