[opensuse-packaging] Updated rationales for specfile guidelines
Parts of the specfile guidelines have been just amended by me. It might just be considered a redactional (linguistic) edit, but it feels too much on either side of the fence, so here is an explicit notification to those who care. 1. The section about $RPM_BUILD_ROOT was expanded/edited to list the shell vars (few and far) and reminding the reader that using them leads to disagreement with a sentence that was previously there: that mixing the styles should be avoided. https://en.opensuse.org/index.php?title=openSUSE:Specfile_guidelines&diff=prev&oldid=121386 2. Rationale for rpm's offering of %__blah was updated, which leads to more emphasis avoiding %__ in openSUSE altogether: https://en.opensuse.org/index.php?title=openSUSE%3ASpecfile_guidelines&type=revision&diff=121392&oldid=121390 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
On Sun, Sep 03, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
Parts of the specfile guidelines have been just amended by me. It might just be considered a redactional (linguistic) edit, but it feels too much on either side of the fence, so here is an explicit notification to those who care.
If somebody wonders about what this is: I rejected package changes from Jan to my packages, because they where only cosmetical nature, didn't fix any bugs and are even with the new wording in the wiki fine. For that reason, he is now rejecting my package submissions with reference to the above changes and some more references to the wiki, but the other ones have absolute nothing to do with the package. Why I write this now here? Because Jan did insist on that I move the discussion to the public mailing list. Thorsten -- Thorsten Kukuk, Distinguished Engineer, Senior Architect SLES & CaaSP SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nuernberg, Germany GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
On Mon, 2017-09-04 at 15:44 +0200, Thorsten Kukuk wrote:
On Sun, Sep 03, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
Parts of the specfile guidelines have been just amended by me. It might just be considered a redactional (linguistic) edit, but it feels too much on either side of the fence, so here is an explicit notification to those who care.
If somebody wonders about what this is: I rejected package changes from Jan to my packages, because they where only cosmetical nature, didn't fix any bugs and are even with the new wording in the wiki fine. For that reason, he is now rejecting my package submissions with reference to the above changes and some more references to the wiki, but the other ones have absolute nothing to do with the package.
That sounds like a very strange approach to the things - the guidelines are 'guidelines' - there are things that are stricter (e.g. share lib packages must not have non-versioned files) for technical reasons, no static libs (or if it must be, a static-devel) for security reasons, patch references in changes for debugging reasons, and then there are 'weaker' ones, that have lower impact. like Wordings of summaries/description, how many variables I use in a spec file, and so on. Changing the wiki to enforce personal style sounds like the wrong approach
Why I write this now here? Because Jan did insist on that I move the discussion to the public mailing list.
Do we have a specific package the review team can look at as a collective? Cheers, Dominique
Hello, On Sep 6 12:12 Dominique Leuenberger / DimStar wrote (excerpt):
... the guidelines are 'guidelines' - there are things that are stricter (e.g. share lib packages must not have non-versioned files) for technical reasons, no static libs (or if it must be, a static-devel) for security reasons, patch references in changes for debugging reasons, and then there are 'weaker' ones, that have lower impact. like Wordings of summaries/description, how many variables I use in a spec file, and so on.
exactly! In general guidelines should be written and applied with a benevolent mindset like: "Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly." Enforcing 'weaker' style guidelines is narrow-minded and - at least from my point of view - it is against the basic ideas behind freedom as in 'free software'. Kind Regards Johannes Meixner -- SUSE LINUX GmbH - GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton - HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
On 07/09/17 20:01, Johannes Meixner wrote:
Hello,
On Sep 6 12:12 Dominique Leuenberger / DimStar wrote (excerpt): Enforcing 'weaker' style guidelines is narrow-minded and - at least from my point of view - it is against the basic ideas behind freedom as in 'free software'.
Almost every open source project i've contributed to has quiet strict code style guidelines (some even mandate crazy things like 3 spaces for indentation), how is enforcing guidelines for our spec files any different?
Kind Regards Johannes Meixner
-- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B
Hello, On Sep 7 22:18 Simon Lees wrote (excerpt):
On 07/09/17 20:01, Johannes Meixner wrote:
Enforcing 'weaker' style guidelines is narrow-minded and - at least from my point of view - it is against the basic ideas behind freedom as in 'free software'.
Almost every open source project i've contributed to has quiet strict code style guidelines (some even mandate crazy things like 3 spaces for indentation), how is enforcing guidelines for our spec files any different?
There is no difference. Accordingly almost every open source project is actually lead by narrow-minded people which is - at least from my point of view - against the basic ideas behind freedom as in 'free software'. Kind Regards Johannes Meixner -- SUSE LINUX GmbH - GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton - HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
On Thursday 2017-09-07 14:58, Johannes Meixner wrote:
Accordingly almost every open source project is actually lead by narrow-minded people which is - at least from my point of view - against the basic ideas behind freedom as in 'free software'.
Free software, like free speech (FSF mentions both in their definition) does not mean that anybody is obliged to listen or follow your ideas. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
On Sep 7 15:13 Jan Engelhardt wrote (excerpt):
Free software, like free speech (FSF mentions both in their definition) does not mean that anybody is obliged to listen or follow your ideas.
Free software, like free speech (FSF mentions both in their definition) does not mean that anybody is obliged to listen or follow your ideas. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
On 07/09/17 22:28, Johannes Meixner wrote:
Hello,
On Sep 7 22:18 Simon Lees wrote (excerpt):
On 07/09/17 20:01, Johannes Meixner wrote:
Enforcing 'weaker' style guidelines is narrow-minded and - at least from my point of view - it is against the basic ideas behind freedom as in 'free software'.
Almost every open source project i've contributed to has quiet strict code style guidelines (some even mandate crazy things like 3 spaces for indentation), how is enforcing guidelines for our spec files any different?
There is no difference. Accordingly almost every open source project is actually lead by narrow-minded people which is - at least from my point of view - against the basic ideas behind freedom as in 'free software'.
Kind Regards Johannes Meixner
I prefer to see it as maintainers of 1 Million + LOC open source projects keeping there code maintainable and easy to work on. -- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B
On Thursday, 7 September 2017 14:48 Simon Lees wrote:
On 07/09/17 20:01, Johannes Meixner wrote:
On Sep 6 12:12 Dominique Leuenberger / DimStar wrote (excerpt): Enforcing 'weaker' style guidelines is narrow-minded and - at least from my point of view - it is against the basic ideas behind freedom as in 'free software'.
Almost every open source project i've contributed to has quiet strict code style guidelines (some even mandate crazy things like 3 spaces for indentation), how is enforcing guidelines for our spec files any different?
The difference is in the fact that you want to enforce uniformity over the whole distribution. Let each maintainer choose his style for the non-essential parts. If there are multiple maintainers, let them unify on a style. But enforcing even minor details over the whole distribution would be wrong, I believe. Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
participants (6)
-
Dominique Leuenberger / DimStar -
Jan Engelhardt -
Johannes Meixner -
Michal Kubecek -
Simon Lees -
Thorsten Kukuk