On Thu, 2020-04-30 at 12:17 +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 08:52:06PM +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> # libvirt-python+dist.yml
> ---
> packages:
> - libvirt
> - python-3
> ...
>
> which is used like
>
> $ lcitool dockerfile $OS libvirt-python+dist
>
> This would achieve the same result with less typing and without
> subverting the existing semantics.
This results in defining the combinatorial expansion of project sets
which just looks like unecessary duplication & work to me. It also
gives different syntax for configuring a container to build from git
vs dist.
There is only ever one project here "libvirt-project" and nothing
about it is is changing, except for which "libvirt" it is being
built against. It supports any libvirt, whether a full git build
or a minimal git build, or a distro build or some other build:
$ lcitool dockerfile $OS libvirt,libvirt-python
$ lcitool dockerfile $OS libvirt-dist,libvirt-python
$ lcitool dockerfile $OS libvirt-minimal,libvirt-python
Okay, this is a pretty solid argument.
It also opens up the possibility of some external project, that
uses libvirt but is not known to lcitool, using
$ lcitool dockerfile $OS libvirt+dist
to generate a base container for their CI use, which coud be useful.
The semantics of $project and $project+dist are still different
enough that we should document them properly in lcitool's README.
We could call it "libvirt+dist" instead
"libvirt-dist" if we want
Yes please.
--
Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization