On 07.12.20 14:20, Stephan Kulow wrote:
Am 07.12.20 um 13:49 schrieb Stefan Seyfried:
On 07.12.20 12:28, Richard Brown wrote:
Of course you can say that we do not want that in openSUSE:Factory, but then the bot should actually complain about the _service entry not being allowed.
We have tons of packages in openSUSE:Factory using obscpio archives -
I know. I just answered Richard's observations that the bot or service cannot possibly know why there is no tar.gz
just none that rename the tar on build time
Yes, and I'd actually consider this not the best idea, too. But the bot or source_validator could still try to provide a better message. Even if it might seem otherwise, I'm not generally against automatic QA checks, but I'd like them to be helpful. The error message given this time has, IMHO lead to a inferior "fix" to get around the bot. The -- IMHO -- better fix would have been to not rename the file but keep obs_scm. The -- again, IMHO -- less good solution was to revert to tar_scm. (And Emily, if you are still reading ;-) You did nothing reallly wrong here, and even tar_scm is good enough to get the package flying. I am discussing with coolo and Dominique on how to improve the user experience, so the next new contributor can get a more helpful message if the bot declines the submission for this reason) Have fun! -- Stefan Seyfried "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." -- Richard Feynman