[Bug 537265] Review Request: acovea - Analysis of compiler options via evolutionary algorithm

[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=537265

--- Comment #6 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs at math.uh.edu> 2010-11-13 16:17:39 EST ---
I'm just looking through these very old review requests.

In general, I believe the tests for whether separate upstream tarballs go
together into one SRPM goes like this:

Are the libraries and main code all versioned together and released
concurrently?  If you have updates to one library but not the other, or to the
main package but not the libraries, then with separate packaging you'd just
have to update the part that changed.  Code developed on separate schedules
should go into separate packages.

Are the libraries and main code so interdependent that updating one would
require updates to all of the others (and require buildsystem hackery to
accomplish)?  Sometimes it's really just one project split up into a few
tarballs.  Rebuilding such a thing is painful and it may be reasonable to
bundle it together.

It also helps to know whether upstream considers them a unit.  (And if so, why
do they split them?)

So, it would be good to have answers to those.

-- 
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.