Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: php-pear-PEAR-Command-Packaging: make-rpm-spec command for PEAR Alias: php-pear-PCP https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185423 chris.stone@xxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From chris.stone@xxxxxxxxx 2006-09-09 21:45 EST ------- "PEAR" in the summary doesn't make sense at all. It is already plainly obvious from the package name that it is a pear package. It especially does not make sense for this package. You even mention the word "PEAR" twice in your summary. A summary is supposed to be as short as possible. Even a summary that starts with the word "The" should be shortened. For this summary I would use: Summary: Creates spec files from PEAR modules We definately do not want to have "PEAR:" as a standard in our summaries, and packages that already have it should remove it. ---- >From the BuildArch comment, I meant to say that it didn't make sense to me to specify an arch, in other words, I was saying just hard code BuildArch: noarch. But if this is going to happen automatically anyway that is fine, it was just confusing to me. ---- The reason we add the cd to the %build is incase anyone wants to add something to the %build they will not have to remember to add the cd there. It's definately not required, just mentioning that this was different in your spec vs. the template spec. ---- APPROVED pending the removal of "PEAR:" from Summary field in spec file and template.spec. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review