https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=550360
--- Comment #19 from Denis Fateyev <denis(a)fateyev.com> ---
As for the spec update request, I would better to fill a separate bug, that's
right. But, as for the final solution of dropping conditionals, I can't say
that the best one is found. It provides two specs instead of solid one; and
adds some efforts to track the changes everytime when the upstream is updated.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=550360
--- Comment #18 from Conrad Meyer <konrad(a)tylerc.org> ---
(In reply to Volker Fröhlich from comment #17)
> Yes, I agree, Conrad!
>
> Ad "clean up": Making something that's "not required" conditional, only
> makes the spec file longer and more complex. It's not an improvement; it's
> neutral at most. The spec file was common already.
You have a point... I will just nuke the %{el5} bits in master.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=550360
--- Comment #17 from Volker Fröhlich <volker27(a)gmx.at> ---
Yes, I agree, Conrad!
Ad "clean up": Making something that's "not required" conditional, only makes
the spec file longer and more complex. It's not an improvement; it's neutral at
most. The spec file was common already.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=550360
--- Comment #16 from Conrad Meyer <konrad(a)tylerc.org> ---
Bumping revision number does not require pushing an update to users. Revoked
update.
Why is this not the right place? Because this is the review request, bugs
should be filed separately.
@Volker, I think the situation is resolved (modulo this is the wrong place for
such a bug/patch). Do you agree?
Thanks!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=550360
--- Comment #15 from Denis Fateyev <denis(a)fateyev.com> ---
But why? Conditionals in the spec clean up "BuildRoot" and such like "clean"
section usage which are not needed for recent Fedora:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag . In
addition, they provide more common spec for all branches, including EPEL.
Changes in specfile require increasing package revision number.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=550360
Volker Fröhlich <volker27(a)gmx.at> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |volker27(a)gmx.at
--- Comment #14 from Volker Fröhlich <volker27(a)gmx.at> ---
- This ticket is the wrong place
- This change doesn't do anything
- There's no need to submit that as an update because it effectively doesn't do
a thing for users
Please cancel the update!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225708
--- Comment #22 from Michal Hlavinka <mhlavink(a)redhat.com> ---
Is there anything left or can we close this review?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226209
--- Comment #8 from Michal Hlavinka <mhlavink(a)redhat.com> ---
Is there anything left or can we close this review?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component