On Fri, 2019-12-06 at 03:23 -0500, Tim Harder wrote: > On 2019-12-05 Thu 17:00, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > > > pkgcheck is mostly used by your CI checks for > > > > producing huge reports, which is nice but addresses a different > > > > problem > > > There is nothing stopping you from running pkgcheck locally. In > > > fact, > > > it should work out of the box these days. If you have any > > > problems, > > > please report them and I'm sure they will be addressed promptly. > > Sure I did that to get reports like what CI does for me now but > > that's > > always been a different usecase; I wasn't aware pkgcheck had the > > equivalent of repoman commit > > While I dislike contributing more to this off-topic tangent, since > I've > fielded this question/request in IRC a few times in the past I figure > I > might as well address it again here for the IRC-averse. > > Personally I use pkgcheck as a QA tool and *git* (or another vcs > tool) > as a commit tool, just like how I used to use repoman and cvs a long > time ago. I generally dislike when cli tools amalgamate disparate > features that they weren't designed for so no one has been able to > convince me why a tool designed to verify ebuilds and their related > repos should support commit capabilities internally.
it's not just like repoman and cvs since repoman commit did push ;) it will never be perfect but i really like repoman commit to refuse to even commit if there's something obviously wrong as you write below, it's just a matter of checking exit status and using git, which can be done by scripting, but the script is standard (*) and mandated to be part of the workflow it also allows to check or templatize commit messages to follow policy (*) and force the use of some handy git options like only commit paths starting from cwd even if other files had been git added, which i never remember what is the git cli option for this Alexis.
