[Cubicweb] Re: CW app distribution with a not brand new cw version

Julien Jehannet julien.jehannet at logilab.fr
Mon Apr 19 14:42:58 CEST 2010

> * Florent Cayré <florent at secondweb.fr> [19-avr-2010 10:39]:
> Hi there,
> the high rate of cubicweb versions delivery raises a problem : how to
> distribute an application that uses not the latest logilab debian repo
> published cw version, but say, the latest of the 3.6 series ?
> Until now I was very happy to tell my customers they could install my
> applications using a very simple "apt-get install cubicweb-MYCUBE" command,
> but apt will fetch the latest cw version, ignoring dependency instructions
> like "Depends: cubicweb-common (= 3.6.3-1)" present in my application's
> debian control file. The only solution I found is to ask the customer to
> specify ALL cw and related packages versions (logilab-common, rql, indexer,
> yams, etc.) but the corresponding apt-get command becomes ugly. Is there
> something I miss regarding apt-get usage? I am aware of pinning
> capabilities, but can not figure out how it could help in this situation
> (first requirement being the solution must be simpler than specifying all
> package versions on the apt-get command line).


I'm glad you raise this point on the CubicWeb mailing-list.
I've the same problem and my solution was identical to yours.

Few days ago, we have the same discussion at Logilab and the
thread vanished in an ineffective way: no decision was taken.

> Once installed, this is no more a problem because upgrading your application
> does not imply upgrading cw as well. Note however that the customer can not
> "apt-get dist-upgrade" either. Is the only solution to this (more debian-
> than cubicweb- related) problem to have all needed cw packages in the same
> debian repo than the application itself? If so, is there a simple solution
> to distribute them myself without rebuilding them all (I use logilab debian
> dedicated tools)?

I proposed a clean and very simple solution in having dedicated
CubicWeb repositories with different released versions as sections:


For example, we could have this sources.list entry for the 3.7 mainline series as follow:

	deb http://cubicweb.org/dists/cubicweb 3.7/

Core developpers should be responsible of the published packages and
their dependancies in these repositories. This job is not ours, IMO.

No so perfect but this "architecture" is really fast to set up.
I just hope that idea will be considered.

Julien JEHANNET                                          LOGILAB, Paris (France)
http://www.cubicweb.org                 CubicWeb, le cadriciel du web sémantique
http://www.logilab.org             Dépôt des logiciels libres conçus par Logilab
http://www.logilab.fr       Informatique scientifique & Gestion de connaissances

More information about the Cubicweb mailing list