Re: Policy proposal (draft): Don't push knowingly broken or work-in-progress work to dist git

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

 



What about ability to opt-in into %prep checking on push?
Could we add some new rules to gating.yaml for example, allowing few
checks on push?

Most of package I manage are tiny or small, prep check should not take
longer than 10s on most of them. I made mistake of omitting patch our
source file multiple time.

Could similar check be enabled either by dist-git file or project
settings on package sources?

I never did any check, but I think the most of packages are quite small.
How many packages could have significant size of sources? If we have
opt-in first and opt-out for large packages later, would it work?

On 1/26/21 6:32 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 03:59:18PM +0000, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> On 25/01/21 19:58 +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
...
>>
>> Not for the first time, I wonder why we don't have a git server hook
>> that rejects a push if it fails %prep. For large packages the %prep is
>> too slow, but we could at least check for the common mistake of adding
>> a patch to the .spec and forgetting to git add the actual .patch file.
>> Why do we allow that, instead of just refusing the push?
>>
>> Does anybody have a valid reason to want to be able to push a .spec
>> that refers to a missing .patch file? Surely it's always an accident
>> (as happened with libreoffice last week) and we should use tooling to
>> help us avoid such accidents?
> 
> I don't think we should do a full %prep (because that sometimes sources
> can be huge and people do some preprocessing in %prep that might take
> a few minutes). But we should check that Source* and Patch* is defined
> and the spec file is syntactically valid. This would go a long way towards
> avoiding stupid mistakes, without significant cost.
> 
> Zbyszek
> 

-- 
Petr Menšík
Software Engineer
Red Hat, http://www.redhat.com/
email: pemensik@xxxxxxxxxx
PGP: DFCF908DB7C87E8E529925BC4931CA5B6C9FC5CB

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
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