On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 08:28:21PM +0100, drago01 wrote:
Actually "machine generated" isn't per se bad ... it
saves a lot of
effort and should be done more (for other packages too where
possible).
Why waste man power for something that can be automated?
As for tex ... we could have a srpm for each one (machine generated
there is no reason it has to be one srpm) would also mean that only
the packages where something changes end up getting updated.
Right, as I understand it, the gigantic single SRPM is to avoid the
normal requirement that each individual package have its own manual
review. For thousands of packages, that's quite a burden.
But the workaround, while not violating any specific guidelines,
doesn't _really_ have any more careful individual review of each of its
parts — it's not a gain. And it has negative side-effects.
If FPC would be open to bulk-approving machine-generated individual
spec files (given, say, they're provably all following the template,
which would be reviewed), and rel-eng has some way of bulk-adding the
necessary branches and builds, that really seems like a step forward to
me.
Am I missing something?
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader