On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 10:11 AM, Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau@redhat.com> wrote:
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 02:45:21PM +0100, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote:
On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 5:04 PM, Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau@redhat.com> wrote:
Patches of yours broke the build, you have a strong opinion on the right way to fix it, in such situations I usually go the extra mile to convince others that it's the best way :) That's why I'm a bit surprised this drags for so long with no real attempt at finding some common ground.
I gave you an easy way out of this dragging discussion and even promised to implement either of the solutions you want me to. You're still not happy so I'll just bump the dependencies now. Feel free to implement ugly hack solution. I'm out here..
Thanks a lot for pushing an unreviewed patch after not wanting to go through proper patch discussion (ie do a bit of research in order to address the concerns which were raised rather than making up excuses for not doing it), that's appreciated!
I did address all your arguments and you still insist I did not. I have no idea how I can possibly fix that. FWIW, the patch I pushed only fixes a bug: libvirt-glib was requiring a version of libvirt that it wasn't checking for in configure stage.
After 10 minutes looking around, Ubuntu 14.04 LTS has libvirt 1.2.2 and SLES 12 has 1.2.5, both have long support cycles and a too old libvirt. Apart from these, supported Fedoras, latest Debian stable, opensuse 13.2 and EL7.1 all have new enough libvirt. With this data in mind, and unless people from the impacted distros speak up, raising the requirement is probably reasonable enough.
And all that data is completely irrelevant for the reason I mentioned again and again. Please point to at least one actual example of any distro wanting to upgrade libvirt-glib to latest while wanting to keep an year old release of libvirt and you'll have a point. -- Regards, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) ________________________________________ Befriend GNOME: http://www.gnome.org/friends/