On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 10:22 -0400, Seth Vidal wrote: > > On Wed, 13 May 2009, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > > > Sounds like a sensible guideline? > > > >> and I think we need to ask if your provenpackager status should be > >> re-evaluated. > > > > For what? Breaking a non-existant guideline in order to help people > > who kept asking me for Fedora 10 support for libguestfs? Maybe we > > should 'discipline' people for breaking other unwritten rules too, > > such as adding packages to Fedora when sitting in bed or not correctly > > dressed. Funny, I could have sworn I've seen a mention somewhere that Fedora packages cannot have Requires: on packages not available in Fedora (e.g. 3rd party repos), but I can't seem to find it now. > I think it is implicit within the definition of 'provenpackager' that you > understand the basic rules of how the system works. +1 > You couldn't be a 'provenphysicist' for example without understanding the > laws of thermodynamics. +1 from a professional physicist -- Jussi Lehtola Fedora Project Contributor jussilehtola@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
