[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Comps/groups/tags-concepts [Was: FESCo Meeting Summary for 2008-10-29]



Le mardi 04 novembre 2008 à 14:08 -0500, Bill Nottingham a écrit :
> Nicolas Mailhot (nicolas mailhot laposte net) said: 
> > How the hell is software going to guess some stuff is not in comps
> > because we intend it not to be in comps as opposed to stuff not being in
> > comps because someone forgot to put it there?
> 
> A simple 'should this be in comps' flag in packagedb. Or bugzilla. Easily
> queryable.

However
1. both packagedb and bugzilla work on srpms, and not all the rpms
created from a srpm are necessarily equal
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)
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)
4. that would mean packagers need to control the way their package
appears in comps in two different places (unless you generate the whole
file from this other place, which almost certainly rules out bugzilla
and is contrary to 3. anyway), which means more packager hassle and
something we want to avoid

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.

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]