On 15/02/18 08:46 -0500, David Cantrell wrote:
First, I actually don't care if this change is made or not. My personal opinion is that it's a nice-to-have cleanup that will probably not cause problems, but you never know with that many packages. So that's why I feel it should be approached using pull requests. We have that functionality now thanks to Pagure, which is something we *never* had in dist-cvs or the former git system. Is that tedious? Yeah, it is. But pushing a change like that across many packages will not necessarily explain to package maintainers why that was done. If packages have not been cleaned up in that amount of time and things are still building, I question the urgency of the change. Pull requests give package maintainers an opportunity to be part of this change. Others have pointed this out too. Otherwise things like this will likely continue happening and package maintainers will overwhelming remain in the dark about what changes should be made in spec files.
What's the real benefit to getting each maintainer to remove the tag themselves via a pull request? After they get the pull request and understand the motivation they now know about something that should not be in their spec files. Is it really necessary for them to know a negative? Should they also remember a list of other tags that shouldn't be in there, or should we just remove the cruft, make sure the docs, examples and templates don't have those tags, and move on? Remaining in the dark about a tag that has no meaning doesn't seem harmful.
I recognize the work is difficult and time consuming.
But removing a useless tag from spec files shouldn't be difficult and time consuming. One of Fedora's most productive and valuable maintainers is working on this, and you want to make it more difficult and slow him down? _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
