Updating waf to 1.6

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 09:28:10 +0100
Thomas Moschny <thomas.moschny at gmail.com> wrote:

> 2011/1/17 Kevin Fenzi <kevin at scrye.com>:
> > I can't speak to the other packages, but I can to midori.
> >
> > There have been at least 2 times that I can recall where midori
> > upstream updated the bundled version of waf they ship with, and the
> > fedora waf no longer builds it. This means we either have to use the
> > bundled waf or force a update to the system waf if we need to
> > update.
> 
> Did you file tickets?

No, but I can... 

> Looking at bugzilla, I can only see one such event:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477241
> 
> > I'd be ok with always using the system one if we could force it to
> > update when we needed it, but I don't know if that breaks other
> > projects that use waf, which I suspect it might.
> 
> It's not a matter of 'forcing' updates: As I said in my first post,
> waf had, and has incompatible api changes (1.4 -> 1.5 in the bug
> mentioned, and 1.5 -> 1.6 in this thread). Our policies explicitly
> *forbid* to update packages in stable releases of Fedora in such
> cases.

Yep. Quite right. 

> So we have these options (from hard to easy):
> - force packagers to patch their packages to run with system's waf
> - start packaging multiple versions of waf (e.g. waf16 for F-13 and
> F-14)
> - allow packages to embed a copy of waf

yep. Sounds right to me. 

kevin

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20110117/279216fe/attachment-0001.bin