On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 02:07:59PM +0100, Viktor Mihajlovski wrote: > On 01/10/2013 12:50 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > >IIUC, RPM will expand macros *anywhere* in the spec file, even > >in places you don't want it to like comments ! So I don't think > >adding some whitespace will harm things > > > Technically absolutely true. I was thinking more about potential > formatting conventions used by distribution packagers. The > packaging rules I've seen don't explicitly mention indentation, so one > could infer it doesn't matter and it is merely an esthetic question. > But then beauty is in the eye of the beholder...
Fedora has a rule: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/Guidelines#Spec_Legibility "All Fedora Package Spec Files must be legible. If the reviewer is unable to read the spec file, it will be impossible to perform a review. Fedora Spec files are not the place for entries into the Obfuscated Code Contest. " so I think this change helps meet that requirement Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
