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 08:07:33AM +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> Yep. Not every package is the same. For stuff like simple
> python/nodejs/rust/ruby/perl/… packages, I know that the only thing
> I do is mechanically bump the version and rebuild. I don't take a careful
> look at the changes in the package, I don't do any non-automated checks;
> if it builds, it gets shipped. For such packages, there really would be
> no difference if a bot was doing all the steps I'm doing now.

That's the thing which I think we're missing, how much of our packages are
simple: bump & rebuild? (40%, 50%, 75%?)
Automating the build from a commit and the update from a build was very much
something I thought would be useful for these packages.

The challenge is to find a way to improve this simple workflow without
penalizing the more complex ones.


Pierre
_______________________________________________
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