On Mon, Nov 7, 2022 at 9:41 AM Josef Schlehofer <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 06. 11. 22 21:22, Hannu Nyman wrote: > > Paul Spooren kirjoitti 6.11.2022 klo 18.15: > >> While I initially thought that $(AUTORELEASE) would be a nice feature > >> to avoid the standard review comment “Please bump the PKG_RELEASE”, > >> it turned into a massive increase of bandwidth usage: Every checkout > >> of openwrt.git and package feeds needs to be a full clone instead of > >> a shallow one to have all commits in place. > >> > >> I’m suggesting dropping that feature and instead implement a (GitHub) > >> CI workflow which fails if the commit did not bump the PKG_RELEASE. > >> > >> It wasn’t a fully thought through idea and I think it’s time to > >> revert it - sorry for the inconvenience. > >> > >> Other thoughts? > > > > > > The AUTORELEASE has been a nice feature from the package PR > > maintenance perspective. > > > > Earlier there was constant trouble with concurrent PRs for the same > > package having the same PKG_RELEASE bump, or the maintainer doing a > > small change with a bump while there was an open PR with the same > > bump. The led to trivial conflicts and rebase needs for PRs. > > AUTORELEASE has tackled that nicely. > +1 >
Awww. I liked the idea of AUTORELEASE. I'll admit I was a bit hesitant about the git black-magic underneath, but as long as I did not have to manage it, I was fine with it. We can try to find some other way (that git history) to manage AUTORELEASE I'm also fine to drop it, if it simplifies other things. > _______________________________________________ > openwrt-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
