On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 12:18:24AM +0100, clime wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> What is the point of including number of builds into release? I think
> the Miro's approach solves it.
> Or is there any other problem except soname bumps?

It makes it easier to do rebuilds which means it makes it easier and simpler to
do mass-rebuilds.

> Ad. document - annotated git tags:
> (-) Editing the changelog would mean allowing to remove the git tags,
> thus leading to potential issue in build reproducibility
> 
> That doesn't need to be the case. In rpkg-util, this was resolved by
> introducing arguments since_tag and until_tag
> for git_changelog macro
> (https://docs.pagure.org/rpkg-util/macro_reference.html#git-macros).
> That's
> how it can be prevented for some annotated tag to contribute to changelog.
> 
> Example:
> 
> {{{ git_changelog since_tag=name-1.3-1 }}}
> 
> * Mon Feb 24 2020 clime <cl...@fedoraproject.org> 1.2-1
> - manual changelog entry that is used instead of a tag annotation
> 
> {{{ git_changelog until_tag=name-1.1-1 }}}

Interesting idea.

> Removing already pushed git tags is probably not a good idea anyway:
> https://git-scm.com/docs/git-tag#_on_re_tagging

We very much agree that removing git tags is not a good idea, that's why we
listed it as a con :)

> Ad. the following approach for calculating release:
> - Compute the release field from the number of commits since the last
> version change: <version>-<commits_number>%{dist}
> 
> I think it is a good idea. In rpkg-util, it is done similarly, except
> the release part has more subparts than just
> two (including %{dist}).

If you make the build system provide the ${dirty_appendix} and drop the ${pivot}
(because we want to generate the release, so there is no input specified), you
get very close to what we described.

> The full description is here:
> https://pagure.io/rpkg-util/blob/master/f/man/rpkg_man_page.py#_262
> but the main difference is that it counts commits from the latest
> annotated tag which contains (in its name)
> the current version and the current release number which are extracted
> from the spec file when
> creating the tag unless they are specified manually on command line.
> Commit count is only appended
> to it if we build from commit which is on top of some annotated tag
> (i.e. it is itself untagged).
> 
> Going by just a textual version change in a spec file might be slightly 
> tricky.
> You would need to go through all the past commits that touched that spec file,
> keep checking these out and look if the version is changed when compared to 
> the
> one parsed from the head commit. Possible though.

This is basically what I had in mind.

> To go back to your original post:
> > For both the release and the changelog fields we believe using RPM macros 
> > would
> > satisfy the requirements we have for opting-in/out:
> 
> By using such RPM macros, you would lose ability to rebuild srpms
> because it will
> be only possible to build them when the git context is present but not when 
> they
> become a standalone thing. I.e. things like this will not work:
> 
> https://github.com/rpm-software-management/mock/blob/cfe34c8a57/mock/py/mockbuild/backend.py#L270
> 
> That's why I think that such macros should be of a different kind:
> macros that are computed
> once when srpm is created and result of which is put _verbatim_ into
> the spec file so that
> there is no (re)computation later when srpm is being built and when
> the git context is already
> missing.
 
We had a discussion with Neal about this topic on #fedora-apps yesterday and I
believe one of the outcome of this discussion was that we should indeed use this
approach, for the reasons you're mentioning.


Thanks for your feedbacks and thoughts (and links!)

Pierre
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Reply via email to