On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 09:36:44AM +0300, Henrik K wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 08:23:53AM +0300, Henrik K wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 03:48:34PM +1200, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
> > > Hey everyone,
> > > 
> > > I was going over open bugs in order of priority/severity setting and 
> > > noticed
> > > bug 7676
> > > https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7676
> > > 
> > > I think I understand how we do things now, but not why we do it.
> > > 
> > > First of all, can someone explain why there are two separate runs? If the
> > > two versions have different uses, how does anyone choose which one they 
> > > will
> > > use? If one is "better" than the other, why not publish just that one?
> > > 
> > > Also, is there a reason not to use a suffix on the svn rev number to
> > > distinguish the two daily runs, updating the DNS txt records twice a day
> > > instead of once?? That way there would be no caching problems. Would it
> > > require anything else to be changed that depends on the number being the
> > > exact svn revision?
> > 
> > Pretty bizarre that mkupdate-with-scores and run_nightly do the same things
> > creating tarballs, but test with different versions etc.  Seems pretty clear
> > to me that only one of them should do the tarball.  A timeline of script
> > actions need to be created to analyze this.
> > 
> > Who's even on this list?  Probably should continue on the bug for wider
> > committer audience.
> 
> Well, I closed this bug since it was not an issue as is.
> 
> But there should be some code cleanups.  It seems run_nightly wastes time
> creating tarballs for no purpose at all.

Committed some fixes.

- Disable possible run_nightly tarball creation, mkupdate-with-scores already 
does it more reliably
- Update tarball lint test much succeed for ALL versions (3.4.1-3.4.6 currently 
tested)

Disabling run_nightly make_tarball_for_version seems to have only one effect
from what I see, "sa-update_3.4.4_20220418083116" style SVN tags are no
longer created.  There seems to be no real purpose for those anyway.

Reply via email to