| 1 |
On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 10:28 AM Joshua Kinard <kumba@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On 3/9/2022 16:47, Matt Turner wrote: |
| 4 |
> > On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 1:37 PM Matthias Maier <tamiko@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
> >> |
| 6 |
> >> |
| 7 |
> >> Just a quick though: |
| 8 |
> >> |
| 9 |
> >> Looking at the man page of repoman it doesn't look to difficult to |
| 10 |
> >> replicate the behavior with pkgcheck. Meaning, we could think of |
| 11 |
> >> creating a drop-in replacement for "repoman [full]" (which would just |
| 12 |
> >> call pkgcheck) and "repoman commit" which actually does much more than |
| 13 |
> >> just prepending the git commit summary line: repoman commit does |
| 14 |
> >> |
| 15 |
> >> - update the manifest |
| 16 |
> >> - bail out if files are not correctly "git add"ed |
| 17 |
> >> - add the output of [pkgcheck] as a comment to the git commit |
| 18 |
> >> description |
| 19 |
> > |
| 20 |
> > I wouldn't block anyone from doing this, but it's not something I'm |
| 21 |
> > personally interested in pursuing. I see very little value here. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> First, you're trying to justify replacing repoman on an entirely subjective |
| 24 |
> opinion of "I think <foo> is superior", then when you get feedback on the |
| 25 |
> idea, you dismiss that feedback with more opinion. |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> Why do you not see value here? The actions described are actually quite a |
| 28 |
> few useful steps in the process of checking a change into the tree. If you |
| 29 |
> expect developers to do those steps on their own, that increases, not |
| 30 |
> decreases, the chances of making a mistake. Or are these steps already |
| 31 |
> handled by one of the other scripts in the replacement packages you propose? |
| 32 |
> If so, please say so and identify which one(s). |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> My opinion is that any tool that replaces repoman should, at a minimum, |
| 35 |
> replace like functionality with like functionality, plus benefits or |
| 36 |
> enhancements. This looks more like a step backwards, not a step forwards. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
I'd be interested in hearing your workflow, so we can capture it in |
| 39 |
the table (mentioned earlier) so its clear how your existing workflow |
| 40 |
will work with the new tools (or perhaps there is a gap, or we need to |
| 41 |
craft / add additional tools?) I agree on the face it may not be |
| 42 |
obvious what workflows look like. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
-A |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
> |
| 47 |
> -- |
| 48 |
> Joshua Kinard |
| 49 |
> Gentoo/MIPS |
| 50 |
> kumba@g.o |
| 51 |
> rsa6144/5C63F4E3F5C6C943 2015-04-27 |
| 52 |
> 177C 1972 1FB8 F254 BAD0 3E72 5C63 F4E3 F5C6 C943 |
| 53 |
> |
| 54 |
> "The past tempts us, the present confuses us, the future frightens us. And |
| 55 |
> our lives slip away, moment by moment, lost in that vast, terrible in-between." |
| 56 |
> |
| 57 |
> --Emperor Turhan, Centauri Republic |
| 58 |
> |
Archives