On Mon, May 9, 2022 at 7:00 PM Kevin Fenzi <kevin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > 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? > Yes. > 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? > Nope. If you look at how I've been changing ffmpeg, the majority of changes are within the same version: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ffmpeg/commits/rawhide > I was pleasently surprised when it didn't uselessly download the old > source after I locally updated a spec. > For a lot of things, it's very useful, for sure. Just not for packages like ffmpeg. :) -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! _______________________________________________ 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
