Simo Sorce wrote: > On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 08:12 -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 8:03 AM, Denis Leroy <denis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> There's no logic here. You're not forcing people to tag after every CVS >>> check-in, as far as I know. If a release 'n' fails to build (for example, >>> because you forgot to check-in a patch), it makes zero sense to bump to n+1, >>> because release 'n' never *existed* in the first place, since it was never >>> built. That has zero impact over auditing. Spec file auditing is done >>> through CVS. >> I believe he misspoke. You are of course free to make 300 small >> separate specfile changes between each build attempt. >> >> There is a desire to move to a point where we can be reasonably sure >> that a cvs tag corresponds to a specific build. Since we have no way >> of making only tags corresponding to successfully built packages >> immutable, all tags must be immutable. >> Find me a way to mark only the subset of cvs tags which correspond to >> a successful koji build as immutable. > > If this is the aim, then koji should be the one to tag the CVS after a > build is successful. Question 1: Does this still fall under the all or nothing prevention of moving tags? I don't know CVS well enough to know if there's a fullblown hook that can be run to determine that "all tags prefixed with koji-* are immutable". If so, that is a way to achieve this and was proposed by Jesse several months ago. > It doesn't make sense to tag an unsuccessful build,a nd it is an > unnecessary burden on developers. > Actually... tagging an unsuccessful build is useful. How else do you take a look at what caused a particular build to fail? I think having multiple immutable tags for the same NVR would be preferable. -Toshio
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
