On Wednesday, 19 July 2017 13:32 Simon Lees wrote:
On 19/07/17 20:27, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Wednesday 2017-07-19 11:24, Tomas Chvatal wrote:
Well we have replacement in spec-cleaner.
That does not make it better - after all, it's a "pick your poison" kind of choice. s-c may not move comments, but in turn it transmogrifies other things.
But at least when it does you can open a bugreport with a description of what has happened why it shouldn't have happened and then in most cases someone will reply to the bug report and get the issue fixed at some point.
That doesn't help with the basic issue of the tool: it (or rather its author) assumes the is One and Only Right Way to write specfiles. Just for fun, I ran it on one of my specfiles (with -m) and diff-ed the original specfile and the result. 1. Sometimes I want to add an empty line between sections to visually separate them. The tool eats them. 2. For specfiles with more patches (say, from ten up), I find it much easier to read and work with if the "Patch*" lines are separated from the rest of the header. The tool moves them right in the middle of it. 3. I don't want to write "Url" because it's completely wrong but the tool will "fix" my correct "URL" each time. 4. I keep (if-ed) BuildRoot in some of my specfiles because I need them to build on SLE11. The tool started to eat it. Actually, it eats the "BuildRoot" line and leaves an empty %if-%endif section in place. Out of these, only 3 and 4 make sense to report as bugs; in fact, I already tried with "3" earlier but the response was that can't be done with the way spec-cleaner handles tag canonicalization. But the real problem is that 1 and 2 are typical "matter of taste" cases. And there are more, e.g. someone prefers to always write curly braces around macro and variable names, someone writes them whenever they are not surrounded by spaces and someone only if necessary. I fully understand that some maintainers would prefer different formatting of a specfile than me and I certainly don't want to force my preferences on them. Unfortunately, spec-cleaner is based on the idea that there is only One Correct Way and there is no place for personal preferences. That's why I find spec-cleaner useful but it would make me very unhappy if someone decided to enforce it to be run on every submission (or on every submission of people who didn't explicitely disable it). Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org