move verifying of checksums from source to fetch step, to include it with --fetch

[Flamefire]

After --fetch finishes it is reasonable to expect that the build won't fail due to missing or wrong sources.
However putting the checksum-step into the source-step skips over the verification and one would need to use --stop=source which does a lot more than necessary, e.g. creating build dirs and environment variables.

Move the checksum step into the fetch step and add a test for that.

TODO: We should rename SOURCE_STEP to EXTRACT_STEP, do that here too?

[boegel]

lgtm

[boegel]

TODO: We should rename SOURCE_STEP to EXTRACT_STEP, do that here too?

@Flamefire Not sure if we should, source step still makes more sense to me (extracting of sources), but if you want to put that up for discussion, yes let's do so in a separate PR

[Flamefire]

TODO: We should rename SOURCE_STEP to EXTRACT_STEP, do that here too?

@Flamefire Not sure if we should, source step still makes more sense to me (extracting of sources), but if you want to put that up for discussion, yes let's do so in a separate PR

Well now we have this (extract_step_spec is a new name from me):

extract_step_spec = (SOURCE_STEP, "unpacking", [lambda x: x.extract_step], True)

"source" is a bit ambiguous/too general: It could be related to anything: fetching, verifying, extracting, ... and other steps are named after their called methods too.

The change is for a separate PR but IMO we can discuss/decide this here already where it becomes an "issue" due to the new logic.

[boegel]

TODO: We should rename SOURCE_STEP to EXTRACT_STEP, do that here too?

@Flamefire Not sure if we should, source step still makes more sense to me (extracting of sources), but if you want to put that up for discussion, yes let's do so in a separate PR

Well now we have this (extract_step_spec is a new name from me):

extract_step_spec = (SOURCE_STEP, "unpacking", [lambda x: x.extract_step], True)

"source" is a bit ambiguous/too general: It could be related to anything: fetching, verifying, extracting, ... and other steps are named after their called methods too.

The change is for a separate PR but IMO we can discuss/decide this here already where it becomes an "issue" due to the new logic.

We use source because that step was about verifying checksums of sources (+ patches) + unpacking the sources.
Now it's only about unpacking, but changing the publicly facing name of a step is quite intrusive, many people are used to using eb --stop source.

If we want come up with a way of deprecating the use of source, and come up with a non-ambiguous alternative (extract is perhaps too vague), then I'm happy to follow up in another PR