library versioning

[Uri Simchoni]

On 18/11/2019 17:01, Stefan Metzmacher via samba-technical wrote:
> Hi Uri,
> 
<snip>
> 
> ldb is the exception as there's a strong interaction between samba's ldb
> modules and the library, that's why we can no longer use the same scheme
> and need one ldb release stream per samba minor version.
> 
> Regarding talloc, tevent and tdb we have an new temporary exception
> because Samba 4.10 still supports python2 and python3 bindings (also at
> the same time). While 4.11 and master only support python3 bindings.
> That means in order to do new releases (which can work with Samba 4.10)
> be need to do them from v4-10-test. The question is if we really need
> to do that for 4.10 or if 4.11 and newer would be enough (which I'd
> actually prefer).
> 

Thanks Metze and Andreas, that clears things up.

We can avoid fixing bug 13846 for 4.10.x and tell users who are still 
stuck in 4.9.x (e.g. OpenWRT last time I checked...) to jump straight to 
4.11 or 4.12, and that way we shall avoid 4 lib releases. If we do 
backport the code fix, the precedent seems to be that this calls for a 
new lib version, so we'd need a new 4.10-based release for all four libs.

One missing piece in the puzzle - We seem not to backport "version 
bumps" in talloc/tdb/tevent. It looks like if a bugfix requires that we 
touch, e.g. lib/tevent in a stable branch, then we upgrade it all the 
way to the newest version, but if a bugfix doesn't touch code there, 
then we don't backport changes just because there's been a new release 
in master(See for example tevent 0.10.1 which was merely a version bump 
due to waf upgrade - the version bump was not backported to v4-11-test). 
That would mean that, possibly contrary to what Andrew has suggested in 
the bug thread, I don't need to backport my talloc/tevent/tdb version 
bumps from master to v4-11. Is that correct?

> I'd prefer that we only backport waf 2.0.18 (commit
> 09e282ec8173f2935bdb579e0396f269ce712e0d) to 4.11 and 4.10.
> And we need new ldb versions for 4.11 and 4.10. All other libraries
> can come from master.
> 

The way I see it, we need either new ldb/tdb/talloc/tevent for 4.10, or 
not fix the bug there at all and then we don't need anything.

Going back to the specific problem at hand -

I suggest that I cherry-pick the actual bug fix (waf upgrade and 4 
commits that accompany it) to 4.11 *only*, and issue a new 4.11-based 
ldb version. That would accompany the version bumps for 
talloc/tdb/tevent which already landed in master, and which don't 
require back-porting at this time. As an alternative, also backport to 
v4-10-test and also bump versions of all 4 libs there.

> metze
> 
> 

Thanks,
Uri.