On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 5:05 PM Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 11:03 PM John Snow <js...@redhat.com> wrote: > > If we always install it in editable mode, and the path where it is > > "installed" is what we expect it to be, it shouldn't have any problems > > with being out of date.... I think. We could conceivably use the > > "faux" package version the internal package has to signal when the > > script needs to re-install it. > > Stupid question, why not treat it just like avocado? >
How do you mean? (i.e. installing it on-demand in reaction to "make check-avocado"?)
