Yes, testing local changes with `srpm` is the main use case. I would even say that using `scratch-build` without `--srpm` is a typical mistake for new packagers - thinking they test before they push, when in effect they don't.
Testing (scratch-building) the pushed head makes sense when there are/were koschei warnings, or updates to related packages and you want to know whwther your package still builds (would build) as is, say before a mass rebuild.
And as you point out, checking out the pushed head gives you almost that at the expense of an srpm rebuild, which is not exactly the same as scratch-building the "original srpm".
`--srpm` is named misleadingly, by the way, because it names the "transport of the source" when indeed it implies a potentially different source version. That's another reasons why removing it (the name) and making it the mode of operation for `scratch-build` makes sense:
- `scratch-build` is about doing things from (your) scratch. That involves an srpm for technical reasons.
- `build` is about building something pushed, and `--scratch` only changes where it is build.
Now I'm wondering: Does `fedpkg build --srpm` imply `--scratch`? I would hope so, and I'm really wondering whether any srpm-mode should belong to that command at all. It's much clearer if `build` deals with sources "in the buildsystem" only, and {copr,scratch,local,mock}-build with the local sources. (Yes, `local` and `mockbuild` could have helpful aliases, too.)
_______________________________________________
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
