On 2012-12-29 19:45, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 18:23:35 +0000, Jamie Nguyen wrote:
> I've seen on a few occasions reviewers mention that they can't tell what
> has changed in the spec since the previous version, as the new packager
> has overwritten the previous spec.
If the packager does that, it makes the rpmdev-diff command less useful,
The src.rpm file name should be different for each new update to the spec
file.
Mixed feelings... Although the purpose and benefits of this is obvious:
- If we cannot applyt the new changleog GL with changes without
version bump in a review process, when should they then be applicable?!
- But without version bump, the srpm file will get the same name. And
both srpm and spec have more or less fixed names for a given package and
e-v-r. - the only really consistent scheme is using a directory for each
change. Certainly doable but given all the obstacles specially new
submitters meet, this might be to much?
These things would perhaps be much easier if there was a better
infrastructure....keeping the intital links as-is, but with a place
handling the process once the ticket is assigned?!
> I've also seen reviewers ask the new packager to document
changes in the
> changelog as they go along, even before release, as it's quite helpful
> for both packager and reviewer.
It's common practice to document spec changes in the %changelog. Packagers,
who don't do that during review, often don't know yet how helpful the
changelog can be when running into packaging issues later.
It might perhaps be
helpful to add a note to the review process that a
change in the spec+srpm should be treated as a 'change' in the changelog
GL sense?! I'm a bit surprised I cannot find anything like that,
thought we all did so :)
Just my 5c...
--alec