propozition of specs cleanups

[Rahul Sundaram]

Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:

>Dnia 03-02-2006, pią o godzinie 05:27 -0500, Mike A. Harris napisał(a):
>[..]
>  
>
>>While that cleans up a line that might be currently unused, it
>>doesn't have any real functional change, and some packages might
>>include that as a reminder to fill in the documentation in a future
>>package update.  For example, when I'm creating new rpms, sometimes
>>I am in a hurry to get a useable package out the door and into
>>rawhide ASAP, but there's no reason to make the package 100% perfect,
>>so I generate a spec from a template I use, and fill in the missing
>>pieces over time.
>>    
>>
>
>I'm working on variouse rpm packages more than nine years (I supose this
>is more than two time or longer than you; still you can find many my
>packages in RH contrib).
>
>Your recent xorg* packages are very *badly* written (sorry but it looks
>for me like this your first bigger work on maintaining spec files .. or
>as you don't know for what can be used awk/sed/perl ;>).
>All ot them have many lines which are can be dropped without removing
>single usable functionality but which allow meke spec files more
>readable like stupid comments (probaly placing comments was take more
>time than verify all this %doc), placing in %fiels %{_bindir},
>%{_mandir} and similar ad %dir .. THIS directories are in filesystem,
>%{_datadir}/aclocal which belongs to autoconf ... many, many simillar
>things :>.
>
>Do you wan't more sed lines ? :)
>
>Look .. most of empty %doc are in xorg* so please don't try defent this
>as reminder or so .. you metodology for me shows as bad it is :>
>Trust me .. by this you spend on this much more time than it requires.
>And probably some %doc reminder will be never removed because you will
>have each time much more importand things.
>Quality of package/spec file as same as .c file strongly depends on
>first impmentation.
>
>Most of this kind "bugs" can be fixed using single sed line.
>Again: do you wan't more sed lines ? :)
>
>  
>
>>This is one thing I find useful when editing a package, that says
>>to me "Mike, you put an empty %doc, which means you have not yet
>>investigated the package closely to see if there is something that
>>should be in %doc.  Please do that at some point."  That's fairly
>>useful. ;o)
>>    
>>
>
>Verry usefull .. for start look on you as bad developer ;>
>Sorry ..
>
>  
>
>>>- replace .gz suffix by * from %{_mandir}/* entries
>>>  This allow choose on build stage generate binary packages with or
>>>  without gzipped man pages.
>>>      
>>>
>>Yep, that is general good RPM housekeeping.  I think the best thing
>>to do, is to have some global rpmlint-like tests run in our buildsystem
>>that look for these types of uglyisms, and force them to be fixed in
>>order for the package to build.  (pre-tests)
>>
>>While it would have some value, and could be enhanced over time with
>>other tests, it'd also likely be low priority overall compared to
>>other work that needs doing..
>>
>>Best thing for people to do, is to generate patches and submit them
>>to bugzilla for now.
>>    
>>
>
>Please don't be crazy ;>
>Diffstat for submitted chages:
>[devel]$ cvs diff -u | diffstat .diff | tail -n 1
> 86 files changed, 225 insertions(+), 280 deletions(-)
> ^^
>
>few seconds on thinkig on sed line you want "convert" to few hours
>sitting on bugzilla which will generate next few hours/person for
>closing and commiting all this very simple/elementar changes.
>Plain stupidity :>
>
>I'm mailing to this list for introduce this in cvs tree in possible
>shorter time frame .. please don't say me "go to /dev/bugzilla^Wtree or
>and try game with your balls" .. ;>)
>Commiting this do not require immediate rebuilding each 86 packages.
>
>kloczek
>  
>
You might have a point but this is pretty rude way to express it. 

--- 
Rahul 

Fedora Bug Triaging - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers