> On 2016-02-23 19:36, kcrisman wrote: >> > To wit, I still have a sqlalchemy tar in upstream/ >> >> That's the "problem"... don't put stuff in upstream if you don't want it >> handled by sage-fix-pkg-checksums. >> > > I think the question is, to what extent are users responsible for cleaning > up the upstream directory to avoid these sorts of problems? I don't think > kcrisman "put" anything in upstream, he just didn't remove the old > sqlalchemy tarball when the package was removed from Sage. >
Exactly. Since I was one of the reviewers of that ticket I "knew" it but of course I never thought to actually remove the tarball. > My upstream directory is probably similarly polluted. Should > sage-fix-pkg-checksums handle the situation more gracefully? > > I had the knowledge to figure out what happened (granted, presumably most people using sage-fix-pkg-checksums would too) but I don't see any reason to necessarily require that of this script. Maybe it can check if the info in the file "type" is wrong in such cases and then print a different message, like "you should check at the following URL to see if you still need this tarball"; that should be pretty easy to automate (rather than dynamically checking against some master list). -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
