On 06/28/2009 07:25 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote: > I haven't referred to Perl packaging, but the general Packaging and Review > Guidelines. Unfortunately, you decided to cut off what I've quoted from > them. The part I find ambiguous. In my defense, I was focusing on the main guidelines, and the spirit of the problem which is this: When there is a clear and direct dependency between Package A and Package B, there is no need for Package A and Package B to own the same directory. I forgot to take into account the versioned perl pathing nightmare, and have been violently flamed for it. Thank you to the people who were able to coherently and politely point out the issue to me and not assume that my memory contains everything. The only other packages I intend to touch on this issue are: (duplicate directory with filesystem) gnome-power-manager policycoreutils selinux-policy system-config-httpd xsane avahi glibc (although, I suspect this change will get overwritten) kde-i18n-Spanish kde-l10n-Spanish (duplicate directory with pkgconfig) freetype libXScrnSaver (duplicate directory with hicolor-icon-theme) poedit paw kdirstat amsn xchm qmmp paw-gfortran monodevelop taskjuggler pikdev paw-g77 ~spot -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
