On Wed, 2008-03-05 at 13:20 -0500, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > On Wed, 2008-03-05 at 18:18 +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 01:11:32PM -0500, Tom spot Callaway wrote: > > > On Wed, 2008-03-05 at 13:03 -0500, Colin Walters wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > I've spent a little bit of time on the shuttle to/from work hacking on > > > > Makefile.common. The general idea is to remove the Release: and % > > > > changelog fields from spec files, and have them generated automatically. > > > > > > Changelog I might buy into, but Release? There are too many complicated > > > cases (Pre/Post immediately spring to mind) to automatically do this. > > > Also, we'd be forcing a hardcoded dist tag here. > > > > We should optimize for the common case - not the edge-case. I'd welcome > > this automated release / changelog management. If a handful of packages > > need to opt-out that's still a huge win for the common case. > > Its not an optimization, its excluding all possible edge cases. The > kernel is a notable "edge case" here. I'm not suggesting we immediately deploy the patch and force everyone to use it - the goal was to prototype and get feedback, and this is exactly the kind of issue that I wanted to know about. The versionscript.py I mentioned in another response is one possible solution. Another would be to add a new field to the spec file like: VersionTransform: pre (or post). That would tell the build system to tweak its Release: generating accordingly. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
