On Tue, 1 Aug 2006 16:14:10 +0200, Axel Liljencrantz wrote: > To me, it seems that advocating always using the same approach to > writing spec-files ignores the fact that some packages are a great > deal more complicated than others. I would think trusting the common > sense of the maintainers to make the right choice in individual cases > instead of imposing a one size fits all solution makes the most sense. Right. With the exception that packages, which are "more complicated than others" very often become even more complicated when lots of conditional code is added to the spec. Conditional sections introduce multiple paths of execution. Fun starts with lots of %define's, a new conditional code block at every third line, and ends with disabling or overriding global rpm macros, sometimes even in ways that are clearly wrong for Fedora. Further, common sense regularly finds its limits when during the Review Process, the packager meets other packagers and possibly receives the first comments on his package ever. Then, when apparently the packager struggles to make the package build, and when it fails and fails and fails and contains problems at install-time and run-time, and perhaps a reviewer suggests fixes, then it can be a good idea to rethink the packaging techniques and e.g. cut down a spec from 32KiB to less than a quarter of that size (which has happened before). Anyway, let's not generalise. ;) -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
