On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 01:12:03PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 05:57:53PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > mistake that caused files to go missing, and was never detected by the > > person > > making the change, because of the use of globs. So I agree it is good > > practice > > to explicitly list files without globs whereever it is practical todo so. > > I'd > > make an exception for files which don't have functional impact eg don't list > > 1000 HTML files individually, but it is always worth listing everything in > > /usr/bin, and /usr/lib(64) explicitly without globs. > > I used to agree with this, but I've come around to thinking that spec > files should be smaller, less complicated, and more automatable. I > think we'd be better having a post-build test warning that this package > has files missing from the previous build. That could be advisory, or > it could even gate, with the packager clearing the gate by updating the > file list in the test, rather than in the spec file.
The further down the workflow a problem is detected the more time expensive / disruptive it is to fix it. So while having post-build tests to validate lots of things is great (and I wish we had more of it in Fedora), I see it as complementary to anything that we can do to detect problems earlier. I rather see failures right away when I test the new RPM build locally, than waiting to push it through koji and wait again for post-build tests to find the problem, as by that time I've context switched my mind away to a different bit of work. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :| _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
