[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

[Fedora-packaging] Re: Request to drop %(%{__id_u} -n) in preferred buildroot

Axel Thimm wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 19, 2006 at 08:35:53AM -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:

>> >b) put a sensible default in the guidelines
>> IMO, the guidelines already include a sensible default.
>  In short id -un doesn't make sense, even epoch or target/arch
> would make more far more sense in a guideline's BuildRoot.
> Note that the guidelines are also there to educate people how to write
> clean and non-obfuscated specfiles. I'm quite sure the BuildRoot is
> cut & pasted in 99.99% of the packages making it a defacto proper
> thing to do. If it's bogus we need to fix it and not endorse it
> furthermore. 

It's simply my opinion that it's not worth fixing something that isn't

> Two independent reviewer considered this a blocker for a 
> review's acceptance (even though it's marked "preferred").

The reviewers need to be whacked with a clue-stick.  A working (non-broken)
buildroot is *not* a blocker.

-- Rex

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]