On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 12:35:34PM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: > On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 12:32 PM Tom Stellard <tstellar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > The proposed changes[1] to the packaging guidelines does require packagers > > document their reasons in bugzilla, but that's it. > > > At the risk of getting too bikesheddy, wouldn't it be better to > document it in the spec file? It seems like that would be easier to > find two years in the future when someone wants to know why a > particular package builds with compilerX instead of gcc. In the spec file, or simply in the git commit message. E.g. if there's a bug that can be put in a comment, that's great. But if the maintainer needs to write a longer explanation, maybe it's not worth putting it in the spec file. I'd just leave it up to the maintainer. > Am I missing a benefit that having a tracking bug would provide? A tracking bug would imply that there's something to be fixed. But e.g. in case of firefox it sounds like the package might switch back and forth over time, depending on the state of the upstream code, without any bugzilla involvement. Mandating a tracking bug seems like unnecessary overhead. Zbyszek _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
