reprotest: inadvertent misconfiguration in salsa-ci config

[Chris Lamb]

Vagrant Cascadian wrote:

> This almost makes me want to entirely deprecate --variations, and switch
> to recommending "--vary=-all,+whatever" or "--vary=-all
> --vary=+whatever" instead of ever using --variations.

This is also a very tempting option. I mean, if we're going to emit an
error (ie. break some existing configurations), then we might as
properly fix the core of this UI issue. And this would also save us
working out which --variations invocations are "bad" and which are
acceptable.

> I'm not sure the variations syntax enables much that cannot be more
> unambiguously expressed with --vary.

Indeed. And, y'know, if there was a call for it, we could add a new
and less confusing version of the --variations option under a
different, unambiguous name — perhaps something like --only-vary=a,b.

> I am not sure what sort of refactoring will be needed to make this
> possible. In particular, how --auto-build is implemented […]

(I think this is implemented internally to reprotest, on a different
abstraction layer to the command-line argument handling.)

Any strong opinions from elsewhere...?


Best wishes,

-- 
      o
    ⬋   ⬊      Chris Lamb
   o     o     reproducible-builds.org 💠
    ⬊   ⬋
      o