Our static Libraries packaging guidelines once more
jkeating at redhat.com
Tue Jan 5 18:07:18 UTC 2010
On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 12:27 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Tom \"spot\" Callaway" <tcallawa at redhat.com> writes:
> > On 01/05/2010 11:30 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> >> On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 11:03 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >>> On the other hand, with the
> >>> guideline being so widely ignored, I'm not in a hurry to do work to
> >>> comply with it ...
> >> Isn't that a chicken/egg problem?
> > It really is.
> Well, fwiw, I have to fix the same two spec files for the %define
> problem, so I'm going to take care of this today while it's fresh in
> mind. But there's a general issue that new things keep getting added
> to the packaging guidelines and there's no very good mechanism to
> detect whether existing packages ever get updated to comply.
> regards, tom lane
In the future when we have AutoQA online we'll be able to add new tests
for new guidelines and alert maintainers who's specs fall out of.. er..
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20100105/1c503fcf/attachment.bin
More information about the devel