On Sat, Dec 31, 2022 at 11:17 AM Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 31. 12. 22 15:07, Josh Boyer wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 30, 2022 at 5:17 PM Neal Gompa <ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> On Fri, Dec 30, 2022 at 4:48 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > >> <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> > >>> On Fri, Dec 30, 2022 at 02:10:52PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > >>>> On Fri, Dec 30, 2022 at 2:02 PM Ben Cotton <bcotton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Rpmautospec_by_Default > >>>> Have we made sure that when Red Hat forks Fedora packages for RHEL > >>>> that they don't truncate or eliminate the Git history anymore? Because I would > >>>> personally be very displeased if my historical attribution went away > >>>> because of broken processes like the one used to fork all the Fedora > >>>> Linux 34 packages for CentOS Stream 9. > >>> > >>> I can't speak for the RH folks who do the forking… It'd be great if > >>> somebody who knows how that's done could answer. > >>> > >>> Fedora is already using rpmautospec widely enough that (if it was to > >>> be problem at all), it must already be a problem. > >>> > >>> At the level of specific solutions, obviously the obvious answer is to > >>> keep the git history. It's in general a great of source of information > >>> and discarding that is just an error. But if somebody were really to do that, > >>> it's fairly trivial to undo the conversion and get a static changelog > >>> again by inserting the output of 'rpmautospec changelog' in the %changelog > >>> section. > >>> > >> > >> As they are the most prominent downstream we have, I would like this > >> resolved before changing Fedora's defaults. > >> > >> At the time we branched from Fedora Linux 34, there were very few > >> packages using rpmautospec and I don't think any that were kept used > >> rpmautospec. Now it is very obvious it would be a problem, so I would > >> like that fixed first. CentOS and RHEL infrastructure needs to account > >> for it properly and not gut the Git history. > > > > We can look into it, but at the moment this is unlikely to change on > > the CentOS Stream/RHEL side. > > Are the packages imported on SRPM level with the changelogs rendered? > They are not. It's done using distrobaker[1], which syncs Git content and lookaside data. Example commit: https://gitlab.com/redhat/centos-stream/rpms/pipewire/-/commit/67142e715ecacbf1c94c4d6f8000ef113c1e7c92 [1]: https://github.com/fedora-eln/distrobaker -- 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
