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

Re: [Fedora-packaging] PHP guidelines

On 7/26/06, Toshio Kuratomi <toshio tiki-lounge com> wrote:
Nope.  We should try not to purposefully stick our hand in any fires.
If we find a problem, it should be fixed, but promoting practices that
we know risk triggering bugs when there are simple, straightforward, and
clean ways to code it instead is just good sense.

I don't see this as sticking a hand in a fire.  It is simply the fact
that removing %build does not affect php-pear packages, there is no
reason to add it.  If not adding it causes some problem with the
php-pear packages, then this should be identified.  So far no one has
identified such problem.

We should not try to do preemptive maintenance on our spec files and
add a bunch of extra cruft just because one problem occurred in a
package that has binaries.  If there is a problem with binary packages
not using %build, then this should be fixed.  You can patch this spec
file temporarily with a %build until the problem is fixed, but don't
start imposing standards on other spec files that do not have this

Until a problem is identified with php-pear packages, no %build should
be added.  If a problem is identified, then the problem should be
noted as a bug and then we can add %build to the spec files.

There has not been any indication as far as I can see that not
including %build is going to cause unpredictable results in any way
other than not building a debuginfo package which is not required for
php-pear packages anyway.

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