Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-packaging (158 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-packaging] Package Markup / Package Tagging
  • From: Reinhard Max <max@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2010 18:35:53 +0200 (CEST)
  • Message-id: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1009031733310.6374@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

On Fri, 3 Sep 2010 at 15:50, Dominique Leuenberger wrote:

The line is as simple as:
- Type of Patch

will there be a list of patch types to select from or will the patch type be a free form string?

- Patch filename

I think the patch name should not be repeated. It is already mentioned in the respective "Patch:" tag and given a per spec file unique number which the markup line(s) can refer to.

- Whom to address in case of questions re: the patch
And a short description.

Putting this all on a single line could easily violate the "lines should not exceed 80 chars" rule if the description requires more than a few words. So it should be allowed to continue the description on the following lines and maybe even mandatory to start the description on a separate line.

I'd suggest a convention that puts the additonal information next to the respective "Patch:" Tag, e.g. like this:

Patch0: foo-bar.patch
#P0: INTEGRATION <packager@xxxxxxxxxxxx> description #P0 description description

Patch1: foo-baz.patch
#P1: BUGFIX <hacker@xxxxxxxxxxx>
#P1 description description description
#P1 continued description

Another option would be to put type and person above the actual Patch tag:

#P2: ENHANCEMENT <hacker@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Patch3: foo-baz.patch
#P3 description description description
#P3 continued description

Unfortunately rpmbuild doesn't accept comments at the end of Patch: lines, otherwise we could do it this way:

Patch4: foo-bar.patch # SECURITY <dontcare@xxxxxxx>
#P4 description description description
#P4 continued description

To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >