Am Mittwoch, 12. April 2023 15:58:58 CEST schrieb Knut Ahlers:
My personal 2 cents to on this topic:
All of my packages are maintained by CI and are auto-updating. I don't have the time (or to phrase it better: I'm not willing to invest the time) to do tasks, I can easily automate, manually. On the other hand all of my package-update-automations are patching the build and then executing it in a clean environment. If the package does not build the automation will break and notify me to have a look at what's broken.
In the end: What's the difference between a maintainer just modifying version and checksums and then pushing the broken package to AUR and an automation doing the same? Also: What's the difference between a maintainer patching version and checksums, executing a clean build and then pushing it and an automation doing the same? - Nothing.
So yeah, in my opinion maintainers (or automations) should at least do a clean build on update before pushing it. Putting up a policy against automations will just lead to maintainers still doing it in secret or to maintainers dropping a bunch of packages to orphan.
Full ack. When I maintained ~ 400 packages, the only way ship them was to have a CI building them in a clean environment and autopush them on successfull builds. Before I had this, packages were broken all the time. Clean build should be necessary before pushing any package, not just ones built by a CI. Regards, Oskar