Bug 1703026

The dependency was removed:

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/maven/c/b0e012bd7c5bd16b78b3906a1272b1d630045273?branch=master

Added back:

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/maven/c/5317cb37c66350e691266a3abbedd85c854a5f78?branch=master

Removed again:

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/maven/c/eb4c6cfc75b967a5e5e3bb4b6f0429c47e03d6d4?branch=master



The package FTBFS, fix at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/maven/pull-request/2

The last successful build has the dependency. The next successful built won't.


I'd like to know what this little revert war means.

Mikolaj, Petr?

Requires on chkconfig were replaced with requires on /usr/sbin/update-alternatives file by Peter Robinson. At the time of change I was the primary maintainer of maven package. Peter was not co-maintainer of the package. Yet, this change was not consulted with me and I was not informed abut it - I only found out about the change from fedmsg notifications. I reverted the change since it was unjustified and it was made in violation of Fedora policy [1]. Only after that I was contacted by Peter on IRC and asked why I reverted the change. I explained my reasons for preferring explicit dependencies on package names.

The reasons were:

1. I don't welcome changes for the sake of change. There was no technical reason to make the change - at the time chkconfig was the only package providing /usr/sbin/update-alternatives file. Any change poses a risk of regression, therefore changes must be justified.

2. With explicit depenencies spec file is shorter, easier to read and understand. Layers of indirection (rpm macros, file provides) make it harder to understand how the dependency is satisfied. Especially for new contributors.

3. Some tools that I use for automating package maintenance do not support file dependencies. I don't have such dependencies in any of my packages, so I don't have any need to implement support for file dependences. Adding file dependencies to maven package would require me to work on changing the tools I use.

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Who_is_allowed_to_modify_which_packages

Mikolaj, thanks.


Zbyszek, would the current spec file (once built) satisfy what you ask for?

(In reply to Mikolaj Izdebski from comment #2)
> Requires on chkconfig were replaced with requires on
> /usr/sbin/update-alternatives file by Peter Robinson. At the time of change
> I was the primary maintainer of maven package. Peter was not co-maintainer
> of the package. Yet, this change was not consulted with me and I was not
> informed abut it - I only found out about the change from fedmsg
> notifications. I reverted the change since it was unjustified and it was
> made in violation of Fedora policy [1]. Only after that I was contacted by
> Peter on IRC and asked why I reverted the change. I explained my reasons for
> preferring explicit dependencies on package names.
> 
> The reasons were:
> 
> 1. I don't welcome changes for the sake of change. There was no technical
> reason to make the change - at the time chkconfig was the only package
> providing /usr/sbin/update-alternatives file. Any change poses a risk of
> regression, therefore changes must be justified.
> 
> 2. With explicit depenencies spec file is shorter, easier to read and
> understand. Layers of indirection (rpm macros, file provides) make it harder
> to understand how the dependency is satisfied. Especially for new
> contributors.
> 
> 3. Some tools that I use for automating package maintenance do not support
> file dependencies. I don't have such dependencies in any of my packages, so
> I don't have any need to implement support for file dependences. Adding file
> dependencies to maven package would require me to work on changing the tools
> I use.
> 
> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Who_is_allowed_to_modify_which_packages

The change actually fits just fine with "Minor, general or cleanup changes" outlined in the link referenced.

(In reply to Peter Robinson from comment #4)
> The change actually fits just fine with "Minor, general or cleanup changes"
> outlined in the link referenced.

I disagree.

(In reply to Mikolaj Izdebski from comment #5)
> (In reply to Peter Robinson from comment #4)
> > The change actually fits just fine with "Minor, general or cleanup changes"
> > outlined in the link referenced.
> 
> I disagree.

Sure, you are literally the only one in around 100 packages so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Looks like it.
Can we please merge PR#2 and rebuild the package?

maven-3.5.4-10.fc30 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 30. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-9af048c9ac

maven-3.5.4-10.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-9af048c9ac

maven-3.5.4-10.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.