Hi,
On 20-12-18 18:45, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On 12/20/18 2:35 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> On Thursday, 20 December 2018 at 11:29, Richard Hughes wrote:
>> On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 at 10:16, Hans de Goede <hdegoede(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>> So I say +100 to just pushing the changes directly, as said
>>> people can always revert them.
>>
>> Completely agree. For my packages I'd totally prefer things just
>> magically be done without any action on my part.
>
> Same here and I'm in ACLs for ~100 packages, too. I definitely don't
> want to deal with a 100 PRs, for something so trivial. I'll revert
> if necessary, no big deal. Thanks for doing this to Igor, by the way.
Yes, thanks!
However, some clarification: do you intend to just remove the scriptlets
and thats it? Or, also bump version and add a changelog entry? or also
that and do a build?
I'm fine with any of those, but I guess builds could interfere with
people who are in the middle of rebuilding some stacks.
I believe Igor said the idea was to get the changes in place before
the mass rebuild, so we could choose to just make the changes and not
do a build. I do believe we should add a changelog entry (pointing to
the changes page), we can do this kernel.spec style where we add a
changelog entry without a version string after the users name+email,
indicating that no build was done for that change.
Then things won't interfere with any ongoing rebuilding of stacks and
the worst problem is a merge issue with the changelog which is trivial
to fix.
Regards,
Hans