Le vendredi 09 février 2007 à 11:26 +0100, Michael Schwendt a écrit : > There has been some unfortunate development in that area. > > If memory serves correctly, we have never wanted absolutely strict > ownership in those cases, at least not when we created the initial > reviewing guidelines. > > It's not worth the effort. It would be wrong to create a dependency on an > optional help viewer just to get ownership of a documentation root > directory. IMHO: 1. The default rule should be package owning all the directories it uses and created itself 2. For directories owned by another package, there should be a dep on this other package 3. For common shared directories where we don't want to force a dep on another component, a fedora-filesystem package should be created that owns those dirs and manages their permissions (in that case both primary and secondary users of the dir should depend on fedora-filesystem) 3. solves the unowned dir/permission conflict problem, documents what directories Fedora considers shared, and does not force dependency explosion. If there are not enough users for a dir to be put in the fedora-filesystem package then we can live with deps on the primary owner, little harm done, and being strict is better than being lax (which always bite you someday) -- Nicolas Mailhot
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
-- 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
