Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > "Anything in the spec file which is not obvious should have a > comment explaining it. > > Some examples of non-obvious items include (but are not limited to): > > * Some explicit requires > * FHS violations > * Changes to optflags > * Not using %configure or make install > * Provides/Obsoletes > * Modified tarballs > * Licensing or legal related changes" > > I trust these are really just examples, not a list of things that have > to be commented on. And that reviewers who are blindly running > through the guidelines and not paying much attention won't treat this > as a bullet list of must-have comments. That's the intention. If reviewers don't read them that way we'll have to write it in a way that is clearer. -Toshio
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
