Dne 11.7.2012 15:52, Tom Callaway napsal(a):
On 07/10/2012 07:29 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> I noticed that in revised haskell guidelines , there is mentioned the
> ghc-rpm-macros package, which provides macros.ghc file, which in turns
> provides some useful macros for packaging of Haskell packages. In Ruby,
> we provide similar macro files in ruby-devel and rubygems-devel
> subpackages respectively. Perl has their macros directly in the rpm
> package itself.
> This seems to be a bit inconsistent to me. So my question is: shouldn't
> we standardize some best practices with regards of RPM macros? For
> example for Ruby, we placed the macros into -devel subpackages, because
> we believe that it is just development dependency. Any opinions?
Is this inconsistency causing problems? I think it is okay for the
maintainers to make a call as to which package provides the macros,
based on the specific environment.
I never said it causes problems (if I will ignore that I might have
unnecessary RPM macros on my system, if the macros would be in the
application main package for example).
I am just looking for convention over configuration. It is good to
follow conventions. That's it. When I was preparing the macros.ruby,
there were no place where I could look and learn where to place this
file and why. And it seems everybody needs to invent his own way instead
of reusing the knowledge. But we can stay with this status quo.