On Thu, 16 Dec 2004, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > --- Michael Tiemann <tiemann@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > It's 7 years, not 5. > > do you believe this is relevant to the current > discussions are not? It is. If you don't think about it now, it may be more trouble later. I'm willing to commit a big chunk of my packages if SPEC files can be used for multiple distributions/releases and there's infrastructure to avoid having to fork SPEC files if unnecessary. (I don't care about a specific implementation and am open to discuss alternatives) A big part of the packages don't require a mandatory fork or don't require dist-specific macros. And an even bigger part only has a few macros. Fedora Extras has to decide whether it will allow those extra macros to make it easier to manage SPEC files or if they fork for each new Fedora release. There are a few drawbacks, but imnsho there are more advantages. (less maintenance required, more communities/resources involved, RHEL users don't have to fork Fedora stuff and vice versa, ...) Only fork SPEC files when the complexity of maintaining them becomes harder than the complexity of keeping things synchronised. My estimate is that for 70% of the cases 1 SPEC file can rule them all. -- dag wieers, dag@xxxxxxxxxx, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- [all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power]
