Nicolas Mailhot (nicolas.mailhot@xxxxxxxxxxx) said: > 2. this stuff can change during the (sub)package life, bugzilla only has > the initial state (and not even all the packages, early packages are not > in there) Then do packagedb, and it's even a per-release flag. Realistically, if someone isn't editing comps when they split things into subpackages, I don't know that having to have a defined person always going through and cleaning up after them is better. > 3. that pushes more logic infra-side, which is not nice for third > parties (and we want third parties to be comfortable creating their own > private additions to Fedora) ???? If they're doing their own repo, they already are doing any infrastructure work themselves in their own file. However we verify ours doesn't really matter. > The KISS solution is to just add everything in comps and run basic > scripts that check every package we ship appears there (say in a > dev-null group for libs or such stuff). You can easily cull the dev-null > group at comps.xml.in -> comps.xml stage if needed. > > Granted, just because a package appears in comps does not mean it > appears in the right place, but usually packagers that make the effort > to edit comps try to do it properly. This doesn't actually help you get *useful* comps, as the first step would be 'add all packages not listed to the devnull group', repeated weekly. Which doesn't actually help you with respect to missing packages. Bill -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
