On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 12:05:59AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 12:02 AM Adam Williamson > <adamwill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Sun, 2022-12-04 at 19:27 +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > > > > > > > The examples you provide are definitely interesting. They all > > > > essentially boil down to, well, "I know exactly how this process works > > > > and I'm gonna take advantage of that to achieve the right outcome > > > > behind the scenes". > > > > > > Yeah, those four examples are very good. But they all can be summed up as > > > "we need this update that is in updates-testing (or possibly will soon be there) > > > to apply to all subsequent builds". Thus, maybe it would be enough to replace > > > buildroot overrides with a single switch that says "make this update visible > > > in the buildroot *now*". > > > > Isn't that...what a buildroot override *is*, though? > > Yes, but I guess the idea is that the workflow is simplified to allow > you to submit an update and an override in one go. Yeah. And also, by "single switch" I really mean "1 bit of information". I.e. all the additional metadata: description, expiration date, owner, separate name would be gone, replaced with the boolean change that the update is *also* visible in the buildroot as long as its on the way to stable. Zbyszek _______________________________________________ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
