On 16 March 2011 19:59, Jim Meyering <j...@meyering.net> wrote: > Reuben Thomas wrote: >> >> OK, so an extra target is needed. I used to use "make release". This >> would seem to make sense to cover uploading and announcing the >> release. > > There's already a target (or three) for that: > alpha, beta, stable.
Fine, provided I can still just use one hook. Would I still call it "release-hook"? > Actually, there's already the release-prep-hook variable. Sure, but announcing is not release-prep. In particular, the rule should only be executed if the release and upload succeeded. >>> I'm not terribly gung-ho on making the process completely >>> non-interactive, so haven't pursued this, but if you find >>> a noninvasive way (or one that's universally accepted by maintainers who >>> use these rules) to make it do what you want, propose a patch. >> >> I'm not trying to make the process interactive, I'm trying to reduce > > You meant s/interactive/non-interactive/, I suppose. No, I meant what I said. I prefer a non-interactive process, but in this case, at least one bit of interaction is needed, namely typing one's GPG passphrase. > I generally prefer to avoid a recipe that prompts me for things. Me too. What I was saying is that I'd like to have a target, which I'll call "reuben-stable" for the sake of argument, such that make reuben-stable does the same as stable, plus uploading and sending announcements. (Uploading involves a prompt, of necessity.) I agree with Ralf that "Y or N" prompts should not be part of that, and I retract my suggestion that the GPG prompt could stand in for such a confirmation prompt. -- http://rrt.sc3d.org
