On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 11:36:10AM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > Good Morning Everyone, > > At Flock, a few of us met to discuss a future vision of the packager workflow. > This discussion was triggered by the realization that a number of initiatives > are happening around packaging in Fedora but there is no real shared vision on > what we want the packager UX/workflow to be. > The lack of vision on the packager workflow means we could deploy something > today, thinking it is the improvement over the current workflow but would > prevent us from (or make it harder to) doing other changes afterwords that would > be even more beneficial.. > > So once that concern was raised, we took some time during the Fedora > Infrastructure hackfest to gather the people interested around a white board and > brainstorm on what a future packager workflow could look like. > > We tried not to link this process to any tool in particular as well as focus on > the what and why rather than any how. > > Here is what the vision we came to and that we would like to discuss: > > ○ Every changes to dist-git is done via pull-requests Allow pull requests, but don't force them upon me. There are plenty of times I want to do things via the CLI. Also, I'd only be interested in using pull requests more if it was in something like GitLab because the Pagure workflow/developer experience is too painful to bother with. > ○ Pull-requests are automatically tested Sounds fine to me (GitLab's CI pipeline is pretty sweet). > ○ Every commit to dist-git (ie: PR merged) is automatically built in koji > ○ Every build in koji results automatically in an update in bodhi The combination of these two makes no sense to me. I do plenty of work where I don't want to build it (specfile cleanup, patches, configuration changes, etc.). I want a build that goes to users be explicit. A better model, in my opinion, is to build every *tag*. To do a new kernel build I could make a tag like "kernel-5.4-rc1..." and the tag would be parsed into the specfile's NVR and built. > > Do you like this vision? Would you change some pieces of it? Would you change it > entirely? > In an ideal world, what would packaging software look like to you? > Ideally? Working with specfiles and dist-git for patching and updating is unpleasant. I want to work from the source tree of the repository and use git to manage additional patching. Ideally I'd have a packaging repository with the upstream as a git remote and my update process is git-pull with git-rebase/git-cherrypick for patches. I don't ever want to deal with dist-git in my work. We're playing with a workflow like this for the kernel and so far I much prefer it. - Jeremy _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 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/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
