On Mon, May 09, 2022 at 01:21:53PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Mon, May 9, 2022 at 1:13 PM Kevin Fenzi <kevin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Wed, May 04, 2022 at 09:45:55PM +0300, Otto Urpelainen wrote: > > > Ondrej Nosek kirjoitti 4.5.2022 klo 18.01: > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > A few months ago fedpkg introduced a change which avoids downloading source > > > > files (from dist-git) that are not used in the specfile and therefore > > > > downloading them would be wasting of resources and time. > > > > The original request was opened here [1] and implemented here [2]. The > > > > logic is part of the command "fedpkg sources" and currently can't be > > > > disabled manually. The logic parses specfile, but doesn't do a deep > > > > analysis, so it is doesn't always right. > > > > > > > > Recently we got a request for opt-in implementation of this. It means you > > > > should actively use some argument (ie. --skip-unused) to avoid downloading > > > > unused sources. The requestor points out that it broke the original > > > > functionality and it is not possible to add any extra arguments into the > > > > complicated release process (RHEL kernel). > > > > > > Author of the patch under discussion here. > > > > > > The premise was that "specfile sources" equal "sources file sources". Since > > > there is a request like this, that is apparently not always the case. From > > > that perspective, the patch is wrong and opt-in would be the correct way. > > > > I think opt-in will be useless and make the entire option pointless. > > Most maintainers won't be aware it exists. > > > > Why would someone want to opt-out of this? > > > > I need to when working on ffmpeg updates, since it clobbers my > regenerated tarballs when I'm working normally. I had no idea about > this until someone pointed it out to me. So you mean where you have modified the source, but the name is the same as in spec and it overwrites your local changes by downloading the lookaside one over it? I can see that being an issue early on, but after initial packaging wouldn't changes always also include the version and thus be different from whats in the spec/sources? I was pleasently surprised when it didn't uselessly download the old source after I locally updated a spec. kevin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
