[Bug 455187] Review Request: erlang-pgsql - Erlang PostgreSQL interface

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455187





--- Comment #4 from Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov at gmail.com>  2008-08-25 16:06:56 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #3)

> > * Using only checkout date in versionin is insufficient at all. You should use
> > svn revision (and date, if you wish) instead.
> 
> Sorry, but the MUST is the other way round DATEsvn is a must, while your
> DATEsvnREVISION suggestion is optional. So I will stay with the current one.
> Keep in mind, that the upstream development is more than slow, I can cound
> the commits over the last year on one hand or so; see also:

Ok. 

> > * Main package should contain doc/short-desc as well.
> 
> The content of doc/short-desc seems useless to me. As far as I read, HOWTO file
> contains this content as well, so I didn't add the file and will keep this.

Likewise.


> > * I'm in doubts of naming scheme for devel-subpackage. Actually we can use
> > erlang modules in development w/o sources :). Maybe it would be better to name
> > it src instead of devel? Just my thoughts, anyway...
> 
> I'm currently only using what the current packages are doing. AFAIK there is
> no scheme for erlang until now. If I'm switching, the other packages also have
> to do so before.

I think we should, probably, discuss it via fedora-devel maillist. There are
more libraries for interpreted languages coming, there similar issues would
arise.

> > * You should use -p switch for "install" command, in order to preserve
> > timestamps. Frankly speaking in this case (checkout from VCS) there is not so
> > much sense, but lately, when official tarball may be introduced, it would have
> > more meaning.
> 
> I won't use -p once we've something official, currently seems useless to me.

Ok.

> As you maybe understand, I'm not happy with flipping some bits or
> lines all the time during a review while it is still discussed or similar. Of
> course this only referes to the current points.

Erlang packaging guidelines are still missing. Are you interested in creating
ones? There is a dedicated SIG for erlang:

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Erlang

but still no guidelines.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.