Problems with core review

[Warren Togami]

Joe Orton wrote:
> 
> But I will always resist arbitrary changes which lack technical 
> justification (or are just plain undesirable); the fact that such 
> changes are proposed as part of the Review Process does not make them 
> sacrosanct.

Regarding RPM_SOURCE_DIR vs. SOURCEn, doesn't the latter make it simply 
easier to read and maintain?  The former requires you to have file names 
written in two or more places.

Sure it isn't against the rules to use the former, but why not make it 
cleaner and easier to read?

Warren