Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <domi...@greysector.net> writes:

> On Monday, 18 January 2021 at 23:29, Dan Čermák wrote:
>> clime <cl...@fedoraproject.org> writes:
> [...]
>> > But when you said "workaround", I was thinking that you actually saw
>> > the correct solution because "workaround" is imho used usually when
>> > someone can't or don't want to solve things the right way so he/she
>> > takes a shortcut. So I was curious what you think is "the right way"
>> > here.
>> 
>> Imho the "right way" would be to integrate this into rpmbuild itself
>> instead of adding another layer on top of it.
>
> +1. Maybe it's time to introduce RPM spec file format versioning
> and say .spec files with e.g.:
>
> SPEC-Version: 2
>
> should be pre-processed by rpmbuild first.

When we go down that route, we might even think about throwing out m4
altogether and using a different templating language. But that a very OT
discussion and would rather belong to the rpm development mailinglist.


Cheers,

Dan

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Reply via email to