On Thu, 2004-02-26 at 13:52, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:22:03 -0700, Stephen Smoogen wrote: > > > What I am wondering is what is the best method for packaging new items > > to be fedora compliant? > > Good question. Superficial answer: Whatever is necessary to create > a package that builds, installs, works and erases, too. > > *What* is necessary exactly depends on the software to be packaged, > e.g. whether it comes with a standard "configure" script, whether it > accepts modified installation paths or compiler settings, whether > additional integration work is needed (e.g. desktop entries, > pre-configuration, helper scripts to finalize installation/removal), > whether it must be patched for customization, and more things like that. > > > "fedora compliant" == fedora.us compliant? Well, there are a couple > of guidelines in the fedora.us Wiki. > > > Is there a step by step guide or a bunch of wiki articles? > > Step by step on what exactly? > Here is a Spec file template with everything that should be defined in a way that is easily parsable by an automated service/QA_monkey_who_will_fling_dung_at_non_compliant_specfiles For things outside of this spec file, this is the order that we would like things to be in. Here are some good examples of SPEC files that you can use as reference when starting with something new. Here are things to avoid/not do because they make QA/maintainers lives heck and more likely that they will throw dung at you. > -- -- Stephen John Smoogen smoogen@xxxxxxxx Los Alamos National Lab CCN-5 Sched 5/40 PH: 4-0645 Ta-03 SM-1498 MailStop B255 DP 10S Los Alamos, NM 87545 -- So shines a good deed in a weary world. = Willy Wonka --
