search

Ravenports / ravensource

The sources to compile Ravenports buildsheets
http://www.ravenports.com
15 stars 7 forks source link

List patches in repology dump #226

Open AMDmi3 opened 3 years ago

AMDmi3 commented 3 years ago

Repology now supports extracting information on patches from repositories which make it available, with intent to provide aggregated list of patches to upstream and maintainers. If possible, it would be nice to have a list of patches in ravenports 'repology.json. The expected format would be a list of paths relative to the port directory (or to patches/ if they always reside there).

Package building logs are now supported too. Not sure if binary packages are built for ravenports, but if logs are available these could be of use too.

jrmarino commented 3 years ago

So you could easily update the Ravenports parser to accommodate building logs. The DragonFly logs are publicly accessible: https://loki.dragonflybsd.org/raven/logs/

Format is ".log" e.g. GraphicsMagickstandard.log The drawback is if the package does not build on DragonFly and is marked as such (e.g. Linux or FreeBSD only) then the link would be broken since the log wouldn't exist.

John

On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 9:31 PM Dmitry Marakasov @.***> wrote:

Repology now supports extracting information on patches from repositories which make it available, with intent to provide aggregated list of patches to upstream and maintainers. If possible, it would be nice to have a list of patches in ravenports 'repology.json. The expected format would be a list of paths relative to the port directory (or to patches/ if they always reside there).

Package building logs are now supported too. Not sure if binary packages are built for ravenports, but if logs are available these could be of use too.

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/jrmarino/ravensource/issues/226, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAISZ5RNPXUSGI3E5VAOO6TTEKZONANCNFSM4ZN45PAA .

AMDmi3 commented 3 years ago

Log links added, thanks!

then the link would be broken since the log wouldn't exist

That's fine, there's linkchecker which would mark missing logs.

jrmarino commented 3 years ago

I'll just point out that currently you're only supporting a single variant. for example, https://repology.org/project/git/information On ravenports git has 2 variants: standard and lite. Only the "standard" variant log is displayed when there are 2 possibilities. Just FYI

On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 3:53 PM Dmitry Marakasov @.***> wrote:

Log links added, thanks!

then the link would be broken since the log wouldn't exist

That's fine, there's linkchecker which would mark missing logs.

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/jrmarino/ravensource/issues/226#issuecomment-806178913, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAISZ5WXKDI6CVBCCQRCUSDTFJGLFANCNFSM4ZN45PAA .

AMDmi3 commented 3 years ago

Repology currently only processed single variant. Will process all of them at some point, which would lead to gathering all the logs.

jrmarino commented 1 year ago

Repology now supports extracting information on patches from repositories which make it available, with intent to provide aggregated list of patches to upstream and maintainers

I missed this before. That's a great idea. But is this actually happening? Would you report the comments in the patch headers? pkgsrc mandates comments but we never have, but I might start if upstream is getting them. And I would be included to include this information. Until now I didn't see the point.

AMDmi3 commented 1 year ago

I missed this before. That's a great idea. But is this actually happening?

Yes, https://repology.org/project/firefox/information#Patches

Would you report the comments in the patch headers?

No.

jrmarino commented 1 year ago

oh I see. it's up to upstream to check existing patches on the repology page (so passive notification rather than active). Let me think about it.