[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Proposal (and yes, I'm willing to do stuff!): Must Use More Macros



On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 12:28 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:

> /me notes that we did pass it in the end, though.
> 
> I don't believe this would be a problem for things like python_sitelib
> which are defining standard directory locations.  using macros for
> directories is something that we do everywhere.
> 
> For things that are replacing actions, there is a certain amount of
> obscuring being done.  This is a barrier for entry for people who know
> how to build software from upstream but don't know how to package.  It
> also can make debugging harder if something does go wrong in the macro.
> 
> However, these are balanced by giving us the ability to change the
> instructions in a central location and having that propagate out to the
> next build of all packages.  And they can make it simpler to perform an
> action correctly if it is complex.

I think therefore I'll plan to to the most non-controversial ones first
- things like the version and directory macros for Tcl and Python - and
then maybe look at the more debated ones after that. I'll bring the
first wave of ones to the packaging committee once I have proposed
patches ready. Sound good?
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]