On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 3:01 PM Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 16. 02. 21 14:48, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > if version_at(commit) != last_version: > > return 0 > > Should this be "return 1"? No, 0 is correct. If the version does not match, this is the last commit *before* a version update. The "max(parents) + 1" then sets the Release to 1 for the commit that actually changed the version :) > To prevent accidental divergence between the git history and the build system. > That's why this information is only used in the koji plugin, locally (ie: via > the rpmautospec CLI) it only relies on the git tags. So ... you want to *prevent* divergence by *introducing* divergence? I do not follow ... > Using the number of commits can give weird results with merge commits and even > though the upgrade path is not really an issue anymore, we preferred to try > preserving it. So rpmautospec should minimize the risk of broken upgrade path. That is possible. However, I assume it's possible to determine whether a given commit is a merge commit? Then it would be easy to skip over those in the computation. And while I agree that upgrade path should be clean, fixing those corner cases by making the whole process brittle and possibly inconsistent does not sound like a good idea to me. And with system upgrade tools defaulting to `distro-sync` mode now, this corner cases are even less of a problem. Fabio _______________________________________________ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
