While I agree with the general idea of building things in order of requirements, one problem that I can see with this approach is: what happens when a higher-tier package fails to build? With the current, alphabetical approach, every package gets rebuilt and then individual maintainers have to fix the failures. This may be tedious from the perspective of an individual, but systemically, it ensures that every package gets rebuilt. With the order-of-requirements approach, if a higher-tier package fails to build, you've got two options: 1) Rebuild the lower-tier packages regardless, knowing that they will either fail, or will need need to be rebuilt a second time once the higher-tier package gets fixed. 2) Stop and do not rebuild the lower-tier packages. The issue with approach 1) is waste of computing resources. The issue with approach 2) is that you'd need to store a list of not-rebuilt packages and hunt them down relentlessly to ensure that they don't skip the mass rebuild. I suppose that the second approach could be automated somehow; grab the NVR before the mass rebuild, file a bugzilla ticket, keep on pestering the maintainer until a build with higher NVR appears. Sincerely, A.FI. -- _______________________________________________ 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
