Hi Dag! On Thu, 2010-06-24 at 14:24 +0200, Dag Wieers wrote:
> As long as we don't have a solution for a buildsystem, this will continue > to happen. I can give you the reasons why this happened, but you already > know the answers and _yes_ it's not how I would like it to be either. I don't see what it has to do with the build system. You are right, we have what we have (and I know what we have). But right now we are using Subversion, a version control system, aren't we? Why wouldn't you make it a rule to commit BEFORE you attempt build (make a shell alias so that you CAN'T forget) instead of coming back and committing a huge blob after you have rebuilt / tested a whole bunch of things? This is SVN. Nothing will get lost. Nothing will break. Nothing will be triggered by your commit. What will happen is that a message will get sent to the commit mailing list and hopefully I or other packagers will read an review it. This is the worst case scenario. If you have accidentally screwed the build, it's not a big deal. Just commit the fixed SPEC again and that's it. This will completely exclude the possibility of leaving uncommitted stuff in your working copy, however. > And I don't see a good reason for reiterating over the same thing over > and over again. I am not perfect and I don't have the time to change > how it is implemented right now. Did you get my e-mails recently? I haven't heard anything from you. Why can't we start changing it slowly and then migrate they finished VMs where you want to see them? -- Sincerely yours, Yury V. Zaytsev _______________________________________________ users mailing list users@lists.rpmforge.net http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/users
