On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 01:22:29PM +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote: > On 07/05/07, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >On Mon, 2007-05-07 at 12:27 +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote: > >> Dear All, > >> > >> I have created a draft Packaging Guide for Emacs add-on packages here: > >> > >> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/EmacsenAddOns > >> > >> Any comments or suggestions greatfully received. There are a couple of > >> spec file templates included which I hope will be useful. > >> > >> I'd like to get this added to the packaging notes fairly soon - > >> presumably this requires FESCO ratification? > > > >Actually, it needs to go to the Packaging Committee. > > Well, I think it's too verbose and specific to be part of the > packaging guidelines, which are more general in their nature. The > point of this document was to outline "Good Practice" and lower the > intertial barrier to building add-on packages for Emacs. So I'm not > sure where it's best put, and whether it needs to go via Packaging > committee approval or not. > > There seems to be quite a lot of information gathered under > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging that isn't easily accessed but > seems really useful. Anything under /Packaging has been approved by the Packaging Committee. Approving something does not mean it gets embedded into the core guidelines, sometimes there is just a link to a subpackage. And there are quite some very detailed sets of guidelines existing in that way, so there is no problem with verbosity ;) But anyway better discuss this on fedora-packaging. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgp1E93RHh3pg.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- 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
