Your points about why touching dist-git for rebuilds can be problematic are correct, I think. However, I don’t see an easy way around the fact that a release bump is required to produce a new build that obsoletes the previous build, and that interaction with dist-git is required to make this happen—in classic spec files because the release number is hard-coded and must be updated along with the changelog, and in rpmautospec spec files because the release and changelog are computed based on dist-git history, and the presence of a new commit is the only way to communicate the need to bump the release. Maybe I’m missing something.
On Mon, Feb 14, 2022, at 10:32 AM, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 3:31 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Sun, Feb 13, 2022 at 04:27:36PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: >> > I used to be motivated to write such a bot, but after the rpmautospec >> > thing, I'm not going to bother. I wanted rpmautospec to handle >> > rebuilds without commits/changelog bumps, because then we could >> > trigger rebuilds more simply (dependency drift? rebuild in side-tag >> > then merge once all rebuilds are done). Now it would require >> > interacting with Git and changelog bumps. >> > >> > Essentially, this is the model that is used in openSUSE and it's quite >> > a bit less stressful. >> >> I think you're mixing up two things here. We *do* want to record the >> fact that the rebuild happened. It should be visible in the changelog, >> possibly with some explanatory text and a link to a bug number, and >> the new build should have a release bump. The way that we cause all >> those things to happen in Fedora is by commiting to dist-git. With >> rpmautospec this commit might be empty, but it still needs to exist. >> > > Why? Why does that even *matter*? In ordinary circumstances, there > would be *zero* information to provide anyway. A rebuild should happen > with *no* effort on *anyone's* part. The churn is *already* recorded > by Koji separately in its own metadata. > >> The bot for rebuilds would need two privileges: for dist-git and for >> koji. And it was the same before rpmautospec and now. And I think it's >> good that rpmautospec deals with changelog/release number generation >> at the level of a single package, and doesn't try to handle additional >> disto-wide jobs. >> > > Touching Dist-Git is hugely problematic. It creates races between > contributors, collaborators, pull requests, etc. The fact that we have > to do that for rebuilds basically forces manual involvement for all > rebuilds. > > > > > > -- > 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
