Request for review: bwm-ng

[Matthias Saou]

Oliver Falk wrote :

> > > Please review/approve.
> > 
> > Noone saw this, did you?
> 
> Still now answer? :-/

Here's one :-)
I'm a little lazy to list all the changes I've made... see the patch.

Main remarks :
- Source URL wasn't valid anymore
- Summary started with "A ..."
- You seem to not be friends with tabulations ;-)
- Stripping must be avoided to get useful debuginfo packages
- You forgot to include the man page
- Passing defaults to configure only decreases readability (IMHO)

And last, the big blocks of comments which are completely redundant with
the spec file delimiter right below (i.e. %description, %prep, %build,
%install...) should be avoided since they're not really useful as long as
you have proper syntax colouring, and can trigger unwanted side-effects,
most notably their inclusion into %pre*/%post* scriplets (although there
are none in this particular packages).

Please merge in the changes that you like, then I'll review again.

Matthias

-- 
Clean custom Red Hat Linux rpm packages : http://freshrpms.net/
Fedora Core release 4 (Stentz) - Linux kernel 2.6.12-1.1390_FC4.s3
Load : 0.17 0.40 0.76
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: bwm-ng.spec.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 4005 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/attachments/20050713/b5e404dd/attachment.bin>