Re: Packaging Committee Meeting Summary (2010-02-03)

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

 



On Sat, Feb 06, 2010 at 12:14:22AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:

> By the way, the whole concept of this kind of macros has been frowned upon 
> and FESCo already recommended that the MinGW packagers simply paste their 
> debuginfo logic directly into the specfiles instead of using this kind of 
> macros. I guess the same recommendation can be given to the font packagers.

Why is code duplication considered good practice here, while it is
considered to be bad practice everywhere else, e.g. in the no duplicate
system libraries guidelines?

Regards
Till

Attachment: pgpCg5l6Ium9X.pgp
Description: PGP signature

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

[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