-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 132
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Draft a Servicing Granularity overview doc #1389
Conversation
imo, we don't want much granularity in source-build. The repositories that are used by source-build have proper release branches. We should be able to rely on that to have confidence re-built binaries only have minimal changes. |
From a Linux distro packaging perspective, they don't, IMO. The way the Microsoft build works, the shape of a repo's outputs on the release branch changes over time. What you get depends on what's being patched for the upcoming servicing version Microsoft plans to release. Forcing packages to build in the release branch puts us into territory that is unexplored by the Microsoft build and its tests. We don't have to make extreme decisions based on this, but it's the root of the difference here. |
I reworked it to focus on the recommended approach and moved the bulk of the doc (explaining why granularity is bad for source-build) into a different file. It should be much more readable now. |
e105441
to
88d37d5
Compare
I moved the doc to fit in better with @dseefeld PTAL |
This goes into more detail on the problem we're facing with source-build#923 "Figure out how source-build will work with CoreFX per-package servicing policy".
@dleeapho @dseefeld @crummel @adaggarwal @NikolaMilosavljevic @MichaelSimons
Update: doc is now here: https://github.com/dotnet/source-build/tree/release/3.1/Documentation/planning/nongranular-servicing-readiness