[maemo-developers] QA process = bug fixing disincentive?

[From: Andrew Flegg]

On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 08:43, Marius Vollmer <marius.vollmer at nokia.com> wrote:
> ext Jeremiah Foster <jeremiah at jeremiahfoster.com> writes:
>
>> To beat the horse dead;
>>
>>       foo_1.0-1maemo0  -> bug fix -> foo_1.0-1maemo1 = All karma retained
>>       foo_1.0-1maemo0  -> feature -> foo_1.1-1maemo0 = Karma set to zero
>
> Nitpick: 1.0 -> 1.1 might well be a bug fix release as well.  Also, I
> think that many packages in Extras are native and don't use a "Maemo
> revision" in their version.  Or did we redefine the meaning of the part
> of a version after the dash?

Agreed. -maemo0 to -maemo1 is supposed to be a Maemo-specific change
or a packaging change (AIUI). Native packages (such as Hermes,
Attitude etc.) don't have that suffix and use a traditional x.y.z
numbering scheme.

Minor bug fixes increment 'z', new features increment 'y' and major
milestones increment 'x'.

So, according to this the packages interface would need a heuristic to
detect a change in just the least significant part of the number.

Something like, in Perl:

  my ($base, $lsb) = $oldVersion =~ /^(.*?)(\d+)$/;
  my $minor = $newVersion eq $base.($lsb + 1);
  &resetPackageKarma() unless $minor;

This'd handle:
   2.0          ->  2.1
   2.0.0        ->  2.0.1 (but not 2.0.0 -> 2.1.0)
   2.0.0-maemo1 ->  2.0.0-maemo2 (but not -> 2.0.1-maemo1)

Thoughts?

Cheers,

Andrew

-- 
Andrew Flegg -- mailto:andrew at bleb.org  |  http://www.bleb.org/