ESR "fedora-submit"

[Michael Schwendt]

On Sun, 24 Dec 2006 20:58:40 -0500, Eric S. Raymond wrote:

> > make new-sources FILES="foo-2.0.tar.bz2 foo-data-2.0.tar.bz2"
> > blah-blah > foo.spec
> > make clog
> > make commit -F clog
> > make tag && make build
> > 
> > However, before you think you feel capable enough to script that and
> > submit each and every update like that, you still cannot avoid spending
> > time on creating good quality packages which are not infested with lots of
> > packaging bugs.
> 
> I agree with you.  What I don't understand is why you think this has
> anything to do with my complaint.  No matter how much stuff I have to
> do before the mechanical part of shipping, when it gets to that 
> mechanical part, I want to *push a button and be done*!

Its relevance is in the fundamental requirements of being a Fedora Extras
packager who has a deeper interest beyond just dumping something into
another repository. In order to be able to produce fine packages and avoid
many packaging pitfalls you need to understand and accept things like
packaging guidelines and/or policies. Else you won't have fun with "using
CVS tags for package releases", %{?dist} tag macros, invalid rpaths and
things like that. Whether you're done with the push of a button depends a
lot on whether your input to the Fedora Extras build system is sufficient
and whether the package will build in "mock", for example. Over time it is
likely that automated post-build package tests will be added. I still find
that updating a source rpm or packages files in CVS and submitting a build
job takes the least time. Evaluating new releases, updating the spec
files, building test-builds and testing the test-builds takes much more
time if it's done painstakingly.

> > > I've still got the bloody printed application form on my desk.  But
> > > I never filled it out because nobody persuaded me that I wouldn't
> > > be letting myself in for a nightmare of bureaucracy and repetitive
> > > hand-work.
> > 
> > FUD.
> 
> Yes, FUD.  Too much FUD in your process, or at least your representation
> of it to the world.  You need to fix that.

Can you point to existing documentation which you refer to?