Re: Defining the future of the packager workflow in Fedora

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 11:42:02AM -0400, Randy Barlow wrote:
> On Thu, 2019-10-03 at 11:58 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > I even go as far as reverting branch-only commits and then doing the 
> > bidirectional merge trick to restore fast forwardability. That of
> > course 
> > clobbers the branch-only changelog section and replaces it with the
> > one from 
> > master, but that's just how things are. Again, I think fast-
> > forwardability 
> > is more useful than per-branch changelogs.
> 
> It's not an either-or. If you resolve the conflict, you can have fast-
> forwarding *and* not pass irrelevant/confusing changelogs on to the end
> user.
> 
> I personally avoid if statements in spec files and just resolve
> conflicts.
> 
> As pointed out elsewhere, we would have fewer conflicts if we could get
> the version, release, and changelog out of the spec file, and then I
> think maintaining different spec in different release branches would be
> easier than it is today.

Small correction: not the version. Just the release and changelog.

Zbyszek
_______________________________________________
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




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux