2008/12/21 Ralf Corsepius rc040203@freenet.de:
On Sun, 2008-12-21 at 15:51 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Richard Hughes wrote:
I'm not bullying you. I'm asking you to stop doing your own thing, andstart using the convention that everyone else _except you_ is using.
Convention here translates into fuzzy undocumented packaging guidelines.
Wrong. The convention %description is NOT fuzzy.
Richard is simply overinterpreting the rules.
I also didn't find the rules fuzzy, but - they read:
== snip ==
You must use one of the following formats:
* Fri Jun 23 2006 Jesse Keating jkeating@redhat.com - 0.6-4 - And fix the link syntax.
* Fri Jun 23 2006 Jesse Keating jkeating@redhat.com 0.6-4 - And fix the link syntax.
* Fri Jun 23 2006 Jesse Keating jkeating@redhat.com - 0.6-4 - And fix the link syntax.
== snip ==
And while these three variants only differ in the way the version-release is specified, I can't see how from that follows that the rest is free form? Maybe I'm missing something, but all three clearly use simple dashes for each stanza of the changelog entry.
Not that I'm not sympathizing in principle with people using the full unicode character set for their communications ☺, but in that case I think Richard is right, can't see where he's overinterpreting.
- Thomas