Bug#932957: Please migrate Release Notes to reStructuredText
Hi Stuart,
Stuart Prescott <stuart@debian.org> wrote (Sat, 3 Jun 2023 14:45:46 +1000):
> > - The list of archs is hardcoded in the Makefile for now.
>
> The following might provide you with some useful way of not hard-coding
> such information:
>
> curl -s 'https://api.ftp-master.debian.org/suite/bookworm'
>
> (pipe that into « jq -r '.architectures[]' » to get just the archs as
> plain text)
I managed to get a list of all relevant architectures via
curl -s 'https://api.ftp-master.debian.org/suite/testing' | jq -r '.architectures[]' | grep -v all | grep -v source
> You might want to make that a 'maintainer-run' step rather than is run
> occasionally as part of preparing a release, rather than as a build time
> step. That is, the maintainer runs that from a machine with internet
> access to find the list of archs that should be used; this is then
> cached in the repo until it is next refreshed. There is precedent for
> this 'maintainer-run' step in various "make dist' mechanisms (from the
> autotools world) and how the dh-python packages prepares a cache of
> known python modules in the archive for later module→package translation.
I created a prepare-release.sh script, which can be used to prepare the
release-notes for the next stable.
That script creates an archlist file, which holds the relevant archs for
the current testing.
Thanks for helping me with that!
> There has been talk for a while about how we might avoid baking in
> internal metadata in packages and there might be more inspiration on how
> to do this in other parts of the project:
>
> https://wiki.debian.org/SuitesAndReposExtension
>
> (there are already a couple of entries there for the release notes)
Shouldn't the above solution be added to that wiki page?
(I don't see it there, right?)
Holger
--
Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org>
PGP-Fingerprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508 3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076
Reply to: