[Starlingx-discuss] discuss about initial value of TIS_PATCH_VER when upgrade packages

[Scott Little]

100% agree.

Scott

On 2019-01-04 9:46 a.m., Chris Friesen wrote:
> When we customize an upstream package for the first time, 
> TIS_PATCH_VER gets set to 1, then generally gets incremented on each 
> subsequent change.  Thus, prior to package upgrade TIS_PATCH_VER 
> reflects the number of changes that were made to the upstream 
> package.  This can be used to tell at a glance how customized a given 
> package is.
>
> When upgrading, it's possible that some customizations are no longer 
> applicable, while others are.  Thus, I think options "a" and "e" don't 
> make sense as they remove the "how customized is this package" meaning.
>
> Of the options below, I think option "c" is probably the best since 
> for an upgrade we might create a single meta-patch to add all the 
> source patches.
>
> I think the most accurate value would probably be "number of source 
> patches" plus "number of meta patches that don't add/remove source 
> patches".  But we probably don't really need that level of accuracy.
>
> Chris
>
> On 1/4/2019 2:28 AM, An, Ran1 wrote:
>> Hi all
>>    I'm sending this to discuss about the rule of initial value of 
>> TIS_PATCH_VER when srpm package is upgraded.
>> "TIS_PATCH_VER" is a counter to indicate change within a major 
>> version of the package, on which we put patches.
>>    When I upgraded srpms(related to CentOS) from CentOS 7.5 to 7.6, 
>> there are different voices about the initial value of 
>> TIS_PATCH_VER(comments on [1][2][3][4]):
>>      a). reset it to 0
>>      b). reset to the number of STX patches remaining (source patches 
>> and meta_patches together)
>>      c). reset to the number of STX patches remaining (source patches 
>> only)
>>      d). reset to the number of STX patches remaining (meta patches 
>> only)
>>      e). case by case, better do not reset.
>>
>> It is not a technical issue, but we will face it each time we upgrade 
>> packages, so which would you like to choose?
>>
>> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/627760/
>> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/627750/
>> [3] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/627156/
>> [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/627770/
>>
>> Thanks
>> Ran
>
>