Dne 11. 01. 20 v 4:14 Neal Gompa napsal(a):
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 12:52 PM Vít Ondruch <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Dne 10. 01. 20 v 18:33 Fabio Valentini napsal(a):
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 17:37 Pierre-Yves Chibon <pingou@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Good Morning Everyone,
>>>
>>> This is not a new idea, it has been presented at flock last year and spoken
>>> about on this very list this fall, so I'd like to push it a little further.
>>>
>>> Do we want to drop release and changelog from our spec file?
>>> If we do, how would this work?
>>>
>>> The release field would need to be set by koji ignoring whatever is in the spec
>>> file. How do we want to do this?
>>> - Based on dates?
>>> - Using an always increasing integer?
>>> - Using the number of successful builds since the last time the version field changed?
>>> - Another idea?
>>
>> What about "number of commits since last version update" (possibly tagged in git)? That should encompass the possibilities you listed above, is well-defined, and should be most like the current behavior.
>>
>>
>> That won't work. This assumes that all subpackages have the same version as the main package, but that might not be true (it is definitely not true for Ruby neither for Perl AFAIK). If nothing else, there must be way to override/hint the automation (unless the automation is smart enough to detect such scenarios, which would be cool).
>>
> Yes it will, because the source version is predictable. Version
> updates would work off the source RPM version, and that isn't affected
> by games like that. The query would be something like the following:
>
> $ rpmspec -q --srpm --qf "%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}\n" foo.spec
>
> That will *always* do the right thing.
>
>
I might not get your point, but working on Ruby 2.7, I cannot reset its
release to -1, because Ruby 2.6 ships
rubygem-net-telnet-0.2.0-124.fc32.noarch.rpm [1], while the version of
this subpackage has not changed for Ruby 2.7. If I did the reset, I
would end up with rubygem-net-telnet-0.2.0-1.fc32.noarch.rpm which would
never override the package coming from Ruby 2.6.
I don't even want to discuss the case Petr described in the follow up,
because that is even more complex situation ...
Vít
[1] https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1397861
_______________________________________________
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
