a) the raguments were mainly between racor and myself b) topic was decided on an IRC meeting I couldn't attend c) The summary of my arguments were given by ... racor ??? d) My arguments were not "I do it with macros, don't care about the rest" => Deliberately misquoted? e) True arguments are that obscuring the buildroot for the sake of an extremely rare corner case (several users building the same package on the same system w/o chroots) implies fixing it for far more not corner-cases like building i386 and x86_64 packages simulataneously. So the `id -nu` part is far less important than adding the target arch, but that was silently forgotten by racor I remember us waiting for racor to finish with his relocation for a couple of months before dicussing topics where he was having an active opinion and in this case it's a blitz decision in absence of one party. I'm also not amuised by racor's misquoting, be it deliberate or not. In light of the above I'd like to ask to rediscuss this. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpeM1pxP1RiH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
