Disttags are nice, save the disttags

[Jesse Keating]

On Tuesday 05 June 2007 07:09:11 Axel Thimm wrote:
> Let's not assume packagers are dump package monkeys. Packages from
> *Core* have been the ones that didn't carry disttags, Extras always
> did to an extreme high percentage from day one. And there were not
> really 10% worth of the whole distribution new packages in Core each
> release, these were packages *consciously* moved to using disttags by
> @redhat.com employees.

Many core packages picked up dist tags because reviewers recommended them and 
so packagers just added that with the rest of the stuff they had to change.  
Seriously I be if we polled all the packagers whom use dist tags, the 
majority would state something along the line of "the rest of the repo does" 
or "I use them on all my other packages so now it's consistant" or "the spec 
generated for me already had it, I didn't know what it was so I didn't remove 
it".  I highly highly doubt each and every dist tag was a result of a well 
thought out process that investigated the long term effects and usefulness of 
having a dist tag in the spec.

> And the people that added %{?dist} to the templates (Ville?) aren't
> that unconscious either. ;)

So one maintainer decides that dist tags are useful for every single new 
package in Fedora, and is /right/ about every single new package in Fedora?  
I think not.  It's great that it is there and shows how to properly use it.  
However just assuming that everybody KNOWS what it is there for when making a 
new package and understands the consequences of using it is pretty laughable. 

-- 
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/attachments/20070605/7fa93f93/attachment.sig>