[Bug 184530] Review Request: perl-RPM2

[Tim Jackson]

bugzilla at redhat.com [really paul at cityfan.org] wrote:

> I would suggest the following:
> 
> Instead of:
>  - MUST: A package must not contain any BuildRequires that are listed in the
> exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
> - MUST: All other Build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
> 
> I'd have:
>  - MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any
> that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines; inclusion of
> those as BuildRequires is optional.

I'd wholeheartedly agree with this (I've been looking at some packages
that I'm considering submitting and finding the removal of BR's just
because they happen to be in the current list of "standard" ones a bit
hard to swallow, especially when I might ideally like to use those in
other environments where the encoding of some BR's that are in the
Fedora "standard" list would be helpful) Who's got the authority to
agree to the change in the guidelines?

Tim