On Mon, 2007-04-16 at 13:58 -0400, Robin Norwood wrote: > "Tom \"spot\" Callaway" <tcallawa@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On Mon, 2007-04-16 at 16:56 +0100, Paul Howarth wrote: > > > >> I was quite happy to add BR: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker) or whatever's > >> appropriate for a given module for the packages I maintain. I'm still > >> happy to do this. > >> > >> I can understand the desire to put perl-devel in the buildroot given the > >> lateness in the development cycle of the perl packaging change but only > >> as a temporary thing for F7 and something that would be reverted for F8. > >> Having the buildreqs correct in the packages has the be "the right thing > >> to do" in the long term. > > > > Yes, I agree with this too, I just don't want to add stress to the F-7 > > cycle. We can drop perl-devel from the buildroot defaults in devel, > > F-8+. > > Ok, that seems to be the consensus. We'll roll the split into F7, add > the needed packages to the buildroots, and get the perl-* spec files > fixed for F8. Hmm - Why so reluctant/hesitant? Why not "_not_ _adding_ them to the buildroots"? A "not-so-unlikely-to-happen" mass-rebuild to happen before F7's release or individual future package upgrades then would likely catch them all when "they are not present in the buildroots for F7". With a little mutal collaboration from perl-package maintainers (and ACL's widely disabled) this would largely be a mechanical process. Ralf
