[Rpm-maint] Section end markers

[Neal Gompa]

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 11:10 AM, Lubos Kardos <lkardos at redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I went through the bug #564613 [1] and now I am considering add section end
> markers to rpm spec syntax. I would add only optional end markers to preserve
> backward compatibility i. e. if the end marker is not used then the end of
> a section is where the next section starts. So the parsing of the spec without
> end markers would be same as it is now. But before doing a change like this
> I want to know opinion and get comments from a wider audience.
>
> The similar problem to the one described in the bug #564613 [1] is also in
> the bug #1315813 [2] and I also saw some requests for adding end markers on
> our irc channel.
>
> Lubos
>

So, I just saw this, and I'll say that having optional section end
markers would be quite useful, especially in more clearly defining the
constructs in more complex packages. But breaking the existing spec
parsing capability is (probably) a bad idea, so preserving the
existing structure while offering the new capability is definitely
desirable.



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!