Re: pkglint & bulk-test-*

[Roland Illig <roland.illig%gmx.de@localhost>]

Am 29.10.2024 um 17:49 schrieb David Brownlee:
> I'm wondering about guiding people towards the meta-pkgs/bulk-test-*
> packages when updating a package.

What exact rule are you thinking about? For example, when updating
editors/abiword, would there be any benefit building
meta-pkgs/bulk-test-boost?

> Possibly a special variable set in the Makefile for the base package a
> bulk-test-foo package is intended to test, with pkglint
> unconditionally showing a message strongly suggesting building the
> relevant bulk-test-foo before committing?

What packages would be affected by this? I'd think the people who dare
updating the packages mentioned directly in meta-pkgs/bulk-test-*/DESCR
are only a handful, and I assume that they already know what they are doing.

> We could just always put a comment in the relevant Makefile, but I was
> hoping for something a little more "in your face" for someone updating
> a package and running pkglint - similar to the way MAINTAINER is now

pkglint also looks at the comments in a package Makefile (for finding
rationales and commented variable assignments), so that would work as well.

Roland