[Debian-ha-maintainers] Bug#898266: libqb should maybe be a versioned dependency

[Christian Ehrhardt]

On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 7:14 PM, Ferenc Wágner <wferi at niif.hu> wrote:

> Christian Ehrhardt <christian.ehrhardt at canonical.com> writes:
>
> > While not crit since all is in sid, but for backports or other re-users
> > (and for correctness) I wonder if the build depedency should be versioned
> > to libqb >=1.0.3-1
>
> I pondered about it... we can't bump dependency versions for every bug
> fix, but is this serious enough to make an exception?  The
> interrelations are complicated, see
> https://lists.clusterlabs.org/pipermail/users/2017-December/014262.html
> and its followup.
>

Hi Ferenc,
yeah I can see the complexity.

But I have not seen an issue that would arise due to adding the dependency
yet (the mail thread is complex maybe I overlooked something).
Therefore:
- do we need to fix every package: no
- do we need to push a a new upload for this: no
But I thought one could commit this trivial change to the git of the
packages that reported to be affected (like this one).
And when there is a reason to push an upload down the road this will be
fixed.

If for policy reasons (If you fix one packages dependency you'd need/want
to fix all of them) you'll nack this request I'm not gonna cry.
So feel free to either push the minor change to the corosync packaging OR
close it - I'm fine with both outcomes and leave it to your consideration.


> --
> Regards,
> Feri
>



-- 
Christian Ehrhardt
Software Engineer, Ubuntu Server
Canonical Ltd
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/debian-ha-maintainers/attachments/20180511/8441673a/attachment.html>