https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1187030



--- Comment #13 from Michael Schwendt <[email protected]> ---
> I am unpleasantly surprised

Stay calm. It's very hard to please everyone.

1) Also some spec files in the Fedora package collection predate some of the
changes in the packaging guidelines. Since no post-approval re-reviews are done
for packages in the collection, this means that old or wrong things may remain
in spec files for a very long time.

2) Some packagers insist on keeping a single spec file for multiple dist
targets, such as EPEL 5 where it is still necessary to set up Buildroot and
clean it, too. EL 5, however, also requires a %clean section, which is not in
your spec file.

3) Some spec file template setup tools, such as rpmdev-newspec, still generate
a spec file which cleans up the Buildroot at beginning of %install, because if
it didn't, other people would complain about that. rpmdev-newspec doesn't
output a %clean section, which is puzzling. But it tries to cover installations
where e redhat-rpm-config is not installed:
https://fedorahosted.org/rpmdevtools/ticket/25

And finally:

4) It's no major packaging mistake, no big issue. Really. It's just in the
guidelines and worth knowing. Reviewers, who miss such things, sometimes get
attacked/criticized.


> eclipse-fedorapackager plugin 

Well, that sounds as if some of its output doesn't adhere to the packaging
guidelines then. ;-p

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
[email protected]
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

Reply via email to