Pavel Raiskup wrote: > Questionnaire right at the beginning, so if you tl;dr, you don't miss it: > > https://forms.gle/Jgr13vtRkiUwLb6W6 The questionnaire itself is short, but understanding all the proposals is considerable work. That's where TL;DR will happen. > Let's stop requiring Release bumps for each build. And let's put an > additional tag into Release, like proposed in [4]: > > "Release: 1%{?dist}%{?buildtag}" > > ... and let the build-system to put there an artificial (but increasing for > subsequent build IDs) value. I am of course in favor of this, as I've already suggested it myself. > Or alternatively, teach the build-system to enhance > %dist in a similar fashion, as suggested in [5]. That would also work technically, although it would turn the name "dist" into a misnomer. > %changelog > * This package doesn't provide changelog metadata, check it online > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/<name>/commits/<last_commit> To the extent that users read changelogs at all, I think they would be more interested in the upstream changelog than in the Fedora Git changelog. > Side question: Is it really useful to put "Rebuilt for > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_XX_Mass_Rebuild"; into changelogs? I don't see any use for those entries. There is already a build timestamp in the package metadata. Björn Persson
Attachment:
pgp5Ca3WKGgdo.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signatur
_______________________________________________ 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
