How does the-new-hotness handle a repo change?

[osalbahr]

The build for Bug 2212029 - neofetch-7.3.10 is available and I think it might be because of the repo changing (see the error message below).

i.e. neofetch-7.3.10.tar.gz is in https://github.com/hykilpikonna/hyfetch/releases/tag/neofetch-7.3.10

Scratch build failed. Details below:

BuilderException: Build failed:
Command '['rpmbuild', '-D', '_sourcedir .', '-D', '_topdir .', '-bs', '/var/tmp/thn-88z36_qq/neofetch.spec']' returned non-zero exit status 1.

StdOut:
setting SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH=1692230400
error: Bad file: ./neofetch-7.3.10.tar.gz: No such file or directory

RPM build errors:
    Bad file: ./neofetch-7.3.10.tar.gz: No such file or directory

Traceback:
  File "/usr/local/lib/python3.11/site-packages/hotness/use_cases/package_scratch_build_use_case.py", line 56, in build
    result = self.builder.build(request.package, request.opts)
             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/usr/local/lib/python3.11/site-packages/hotness/builders/koji.py", line 229, in build
    raise BuilderException(

If you think this issue is caused by some bug in the-new-hotness, please report it on the-new-hotness issue tracker: https://github.com/fedora-infra/the-new-hotness/issues

What is the proper course of action for such cases? Should the-new-hotness flag that the repo changed, for example?

[Zlopez]

In this case the spec file in neofetch source repository needs to be updated to point to correct source. Hotness is just trying to do the scratch build and it doesn't analyze the result, just notify the maintainer that something went wrong.

[osalbahr]

Makes sense, thx for clarifying. I am closing this since the main question was answered.

Out of curiosity, how did Hotness pickup that Hyfetch maintains a fork of neofetch and concluded that "neofetch-7.3.10 is available"?

[Zlopez]

Hotness is taking the information about that from the release-monitoring.org project. Here is the neofetch project.

[kees-closed]

I'm the maintainer of the neofetch package for Fedora. Is changing the upstream repo for an existing package a common method? I know it's a fork of neofetch, but it continues under a different name, right? Wouldn't it make more sense to start a new package called hyfetch with the new repo? Then we can just retire neofetch. I don't have the time or interest to package hyfetch, so if someone else wants to package that one. There is also fastfetch.

In case the Fedora dev community thinks it's a good idea to switch to a different upstream source, but keep the name of the original package name, then I'll fix that and continue. But I personally think it's messy. What if the original maintainer of neofetch starts developing again?

[Zlopez]

@kees-closed It will be best to start this discussion on fedora-devel mailing list or https://discussions.fedoraproject.org. I don't know that much about Fedora packaging to be able to answer your questions.