On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 10:06 AM, Remi Collet <Fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Le 03/07/2010 10:02, Iain Arnell a écrit : > >>> How this should be handled nicely ? >> >> Exactly as it is at the minute - continue allow perl modules to share >> directory ownership. >> >> I think the "Multiple packages own files in a common directory but >> none of them needs to require the others."[1] rule would cover it. In >> general, module A::B::C doesn't necessarily require A::B (or even A). > > Of course, I was asking in the case A::B::C requires A::B > > In the case of the package I'm working on the review: > perl-Test-Script-Run requires perl-Test-Exception > which own /usr/share/perl5/Test dir. Well the perl rpm itself owns /usr/share/perl5/Test, so then no perl-Test-* module should own it. It's going to be considerably simpler to allow shared directory ownership rather than force everyone to analyse dependencies and narrow down ownership where possible. And of course, there's the possibility that dependencies change in future and we could end up with unowned directories unless you repeat the analysis. -- Iain. -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
