Re: Proposed Fedora packaging guideline: More Go packaging

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

 



I wish this message wasn't crossposted everywhere, but I don't want to
lose any discussion by trimming the CC list.  Sorry if replies generate
bounces for some.

>>>>> "nm" == nicolas mailhot <nicolas.mailhot@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

nm> And the forge macros are now available since
nm> redhat-rpm-config-73-1.fc28 (I had missed the push due to upstream
nm> renaming the file). Heartfelt thanks to Jason Tibbitts !

Please don't forget to let me know when it's time to start thinking
about pushing this down to F27.  And maybe F26.  And as far as I can
tell it should work with only minor modification in EPEL7 (via
epel-rpm-macros).  I don't know about EPEL6, but we really should look
at it given some of the other discussions about specfile compatibility.
Some packagers wouldn't ever use it if it doesn't work everywhere.

Finally, we should also talk about whether there is any integration or
automation possible between fedpkg and specfiles configured with these
macros.

 - J<
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[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