In order for rdopkg to fix the .spec instead of just warning about problem
and failing (specfile.sanity_check), more transparent linting mechanism is needed that
allows:
checking whether there are .spec errors (rdopkg lint/rdopkg check)
fix .spec errors (rdopkg lint --fix)
rdopkg patch/new-version integration. Fail on lint warning and tell user to fix with dedicated rdopkg lint --fix or additional command option a la --fix-issues to avoid touching people's .spec files in ways they didn't expect during patch/new-version.
reusability. Only specific checks might be needed by patch/new-version so make it easy to select subset of checks/fixes to perform.
easier solution of related issues requesting .spec checks: #66, #110, #112, #114
In order for
rdopkg
to fix the.spec
instead of just warning about problem and failing (specfile.sanity_check), more transparent linting mechanism is needed that allows:.spec
errors (rdopkg lint
/rdopkg check
).spec
errors (rdopkg lint --fix
)rdopkg patch/new-version
integration. Fail on lint warning and tell user to fix with dedicatedrdopkg lint --fix
or additional command option a la--fix-issues
to avoid touching people's.spec
files in ways they didn't expect duringpatch/new-version
.patch/new-version
so make it easy to select subset of checks/fixes to perform..spec
checks: #66, #110, #112, #114