Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] repo/gentoo:master commit in: app-emulation/runc/

[Matt Turner <mattst88@gentoo.org>]

On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 1:26 PM, Matt Turner <mattst88@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Robin H. Johnson <robbat2@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 05:16:01AM +0000, Doug Goldstein wrote:
>>>> commit:     37c1ec7ef31a51206421f03a2df489ec7d7ca244
>>>> Author:     Doug Goldstein <cardoe <AT> gentoo <DOT> org>
>>>> AuthorDate: Mon Dec  7 05:14:50 2015 +0000
>>>> Commit:     Doug Goldstein <cardoe <AT> gentoo <DOT> org>
>>>> CommitDate: Mon Dec  7 05:15:22 2015 +0000
>>>> URL:        https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=37c1ec7e
>>>>
>>>> app-emulation/runc: version bump
>>>>
>>>> bump to latest upstream release.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Doug Goldstein <cardoe <AT> gentoo.org>
>>>>
>>>>  app-emulation/runc/runc-0.0.5.ebuild | 52 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>  1 file changed, 52 insertions(+)
>>> You did not update the Manifest or use repoman, and thus blocked the
>>> rsync tree.
>>>
>>> I fixed it now.
>>
>> This is happening with some frequency. Could we install a server-side
>> git hook that prevents pushes if an ebuild is added without a Manifest
>> change? It wouldn't have to verify anything more than that to catch
>> nearly all of these problems.
>>
>
> That would not work for ebuilds which do not have any distfiles
> associated with them.

Good point.

It *would* have to be somewhat more involved then...