On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 12:49:09PM -0600, Richard Shaw wrote: > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 12:38 PM, Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 01:12:03PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 05:57:53PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > > mistake that caused files to go missing, and was never detected by the > > person > > > > making the change, because of the use of globs. So I agree it is good > > practice > > > > to explicitly list files without globs whereever it is practical todo > > so. I'd > > > > make an exception for files which don't have functional impact eg > > don't list > > > > 1000 HTML files individually, but it is always worth listing > > everything in > > > > /usr/bin, and /usr/lib(64) explicitly without globs. > > > > > > I used to agree with this, but I've come around to thinking that spec > > > files should be smaller, less complicated, and more automatable. I > > > think we'd be better having a post-build test warning that this package > > > has files missing from the previous build. That could be advisory, or > > > it could even gate, with the packager clearing the gate by updating the > > > file list in the test, rather than in the spec file. > > > > The further down the workflow a problem is detected the more time expensive > > / disruptive it is to fix it. So while having post-build tests to validate > > lots of things is great (and I wish we had more of it in Fedora), I see it > > as complementary to anything that we can do to detect problems earlier. I > > rather see failures right away when I test the new RPM build locally, than > > waiting to push it through koji and wait again for post-build tests to find > > the problem, as by that time I've context switched my mind away to a > > different bit of work. > > > I don't have the infra experience to implement, but what about adding > adding a pkgdiff option to fedpkg where it would complete a scratch build > (--srpm if necessary) and then run pkgdiff against it and the current > packages in the repository and putting the report somewhere accessible? My typical scenario is to use a combination of "fedpkg local" and "fedpkg scratch-build". So if there's a way to run tests on the results of either or both of those, that could be a useful thing. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :| _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
