[wpkg-users] [Bug 117] Dependencies ignore priority

[bugzilla-daemon at bugzilla.wpkg.org]

http://bugzilla.wpkg.org/show_bug.cgi?id=117





--- Comment #10 from Frank Lee <rl201 at cam.ac.uk>  2008-05-09 18:59:10 ---

> This is exactly how it is meant to be used. The service pack is for sure
> depending on the installation of OfficeXP - not the other way around!

This is exactly how you intend it to be used now. It is not how I intended it
to be used when I wrote it!

> I've never ever seen a program which interprets 'dependency' in another way. If
> thing b depends on thing a then for sure thing a needs to be done BEFORE thing
> b can be done. Did some of you ever use a project management tool like OpenProj
> or MS Project? Try defining a dependency, you will never ever be able to
> execute task b before task a if task b depends on task a.
> Also in every dictionary everybody can read that a dependency means that the
> thing which I depend on needs to be done in advance in order to be able to
> finish my task.

The discussion of soft depends (run-time) vs hard depends (install time) has
happened ^ up there I think. 

> Service Pack 4 will simply also depend on OfficeXP. Period.
> Then you just add Service Pack 4 to the profile - finished. If OfficeXP is
> installed already (or installed before due to higher priority) then Service
> Pack x is just installing. If OfficeXP is not yet installed when it's the turn
> of the Service Pack it will install OfficeXP _before_.
> So in fact you would even not have to add OfficeXP to the profile. Just add the
> Service Pack and it makes sure Office is installed too. That's true dependency
> management.

I maintain 593 different profiles. When service pack 4 comes out, I definitely
do *not* want to adjust 593 profiles in order to make the change! For me, the
solution has to be at package level - using what you now call "includes" and
what I used to call "depends", I think.

> Now this request brings in another aspect. As proposed an <include /> node
> could be introduced. The difference to dependencies and chained installations
> is that the packages included might be installed either before or after the
> package according to their priority.

Umm, I would just point out that the combination of priority and the original
meaning of "depends" would cover chaining and dependencies!

> Of course one could also build some kind of "lazy" dependency by using include
> and playing with the priorities. As this is quite easy when looking at a few
> packages it gets very complex when hundreds of package are involved. It would
> become very hard to trace that actually all packages required for a program
> have a higher priority. Then it is much easier to define a hard dependency.

I agree with you - I was intending to code up "pre-depends" as a tag after
doing "depends" but it seems that's not necessary now!


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.wpkg.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.