On 05 Feb 2007 20:13:27 -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > >>>>> "MS" == Michael Schwendt writes: > > MS> When we faced this topic in Extras and FESCo, nobody showed any > MS> interest in it. > > Actually the packaging committee had some significant discussions > about it. Strangely, the results of that discussion are unknown and/or have not been communicated back in an appropriate way. Fesco list was silent with regard to that matter, and that was one week before the elections and four days before receiving spot's first mail about the foundation of the packaging committee. > I recall that I was against changing the meaning of noarch. What is the "meaning of noarch" in your point of view? I've not seen a single comment on the topic from anyone inside fesco except jkatz, who briefly outlined what's done in core. Don't get me wrong, please. I don't care much about the meaning of it, and I've had fun adding the ExcludeArch for noarch stuff to the extras pushscript even if I think RPM is flawed in that it doesn't propagate the ExcludeArch tag into the binary package. But if you see in me somebody who seems to complain often, even about past issues, this is because I very much dislike all the unpleasant experience and the "walls out of concrete" that turn up in the project. -- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers -- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
