Yes, testing local changes with `srpm` is the main use case. I would even say
that using `scratch-build` without `--srpm` is a typical mistake for new
packagers - thinking they test before they push, when in effect they don't.
Testing (scratch-building) the pushed head makes sense when there are/were
koschei warnings, or updates to related packages and you want to know whwther
your package still builds (would build) as is, say before a mass rebuild.
And as you point out, checking out the pushed head gives you almost that at the
expense of an srpm rebuild, which is not exactly the same as scratch-building
the "original srpm".
`--srpm` is named misleadingly, by the way, because it names the "transport of
the source" when indeed it implies a potentially different source version.
That's another reasons why removing it (the name) and making it the mode of
operation for `scratch-build` makes sense:
- `scratch-build` is about doing things from (your) scratch. That involves an
srpm for technical reasons.
- `build` is about building something pushed, and `--scratch` only changes
where it is build.
Now I'm wondering: Does `fedpkg build --srpm` imply `--scratch`? I would hope
so, and I'm really wondering whether any srpm-mode should belong to that
command at all. It's much clearer if `build` deals with sources "in the
buildsystem" only, and {copr,scratch,local,mock}-build with the local sources.
(Yes, `local` and `mockbuild` could have helpful aliases, too.)
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
