Re: Package Maintainers Flags policy

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 05/19/2009 09:32 AM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Seth Vidal (skvidal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) said:
* If a program is needed for the main spin but Provides:
Politics(flags), someone must do the work to move the flags into a
subpackage that Provides the flags and patch the program to make
existence of the flags optional.  As noted above, that subpackage
cannot be Required from the package that is on the main spin.
If we end up needing  yum plugin of some kind to handle this can I call
it the free-randomstan plugin?

We don't have a yum-patents plugin, or Provides(patents). Why are we
going to such lengths here?

Wouldn't a policy on Provides: Policy(patents) have to originate with rpmfusion?

-Toshio

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux