feat(files): accept doc
, licen[cs]e
, and readme
with non-rpm
#698
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
See commentary in code for elaboration.
This PR might be a bit incomplete: untested, no test coverage I think, and perhaps
RPM
should be dropped from the type names (with aliases for backwards compatibility) to make it clearer that files with them do get included with non-rpm packagers too.Anyway, submitting here already in this form for discussion, before spending more time on it.
One example case is at https://github.com/aakso/ssh-inscribe/blob/7922b3e15f5fd9569c927f1464982c6f9e870f5b/.goreleaser.yaml#L69-L82. Note how the
LICENSE
andREADME.md
entries need to be duplicated for deb and rpm; deb without the type info, rpm with it. It would get worse if there were more packager types enabled.