Re: Summary of the 2009-01-20 Packaging Committee meeting

Richard W.M. Jones wrote:

"Anything in the spec file which is not obvious should have a comment explaining it.

Some examples of non-obvious items include (but are not limited to):

* Some explicit requires
* FHS violations
* Changes to optflags
* Not using %configure or make install
* Provides/Obsoletes
* Modified tarballs
* Licensing or legal related changes"

I trust these are really just examples, not a list of things that have to be commented on. And that reviewers who are blindly running through the guidelines and not paying much attention won't treat this as a bullet list of must-have comments.

That's the intention. If reviewers don't read them that way we'll have to write it in a way that is clearer.

-Toshio