Bump flag behavior not consistent with documentation

[majamassarini]

Packit has a --no-bump flag, since bump should mean increase the number of version, a user could expect that omitting the --no-bump flag would result in a increased release number. Moreover we deal with releases and not versions, this also can be not easily understandable when talking about bumping.

We have to update the documentation and explain to our users that:

• the --no-bump flag and the release_suffix: '' on .packit.yaml (the first one is for CLI the second one is for packit-service) mean we are going to use the Release number we found on the SPEC file. And thus we are not updating it in the SPEC file,
• if no --no-bump flag is given we do change the Release, and we update the SPEC file, following what we have in the --release-suffix CLI flag or in the release_suffix: .packit.yaml key:
  • if release-suffix is None then we generate a Release number like this: {original_release_number}.{current_time}.{sanitized_current_branch}{git_desc_suffix}
  • if release-suffix is str then we generate a Release number like this: {original_release_number}.str. We will never increase the release number here and we will always generate the same release!

A table with many examples on how to use the flags related with the release_suffix is here: https://gist.github.com/majamassarini/f2ebf6a78ca8af189208e77074a16dff

[lachmanfrantisek]

Thanks Maja for the detailed description.

Is this just about the documentation or we should improve the tool as well (e.g. the man pages, CLI option names...)?

[majamassarini]

I would say at least the documentation.

If we had time I would change the --no-bump flag and choose another name, something like --no-update-spec-release. But then we need to change the code, the CLI, the man pages...

[lachmanfrantisek]

We can add a new CLI argument and deprecate the old one. Or, at least update the help for the old one...

So we can leave the issue in this repository. (I've been thinking about moving it to packit.dev but it looks like some changes would be nice here as well.)

[mfocko]

Related to packit/packit-service#1760