>>>>> "RWMJ" == Richard W M Jones <rjones@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: RWMJ> But wouldn't a single package in fact be preferable, as it'll be RWMJ> simpler than maintaining multiple packages: I would argue that it's far from preferable, because you would have multiple things on different release schedules in one package. A change in one version, or adding a new version, forces a pointless update on all of the subpackages. (Texlive is an extreme example of how bad this is.) That said, texlive is also an example of how this kind of thing has been reluctantly permitted in the past, but in the case of texlive it's really only due to that being how the pre-texlive packaging was historically maintained. I certainly wouldn't advocate to anything purposefully switching to that method. Finally, my understanding is that the packaging guidelines are silent on the issue. - J< _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/NTU7AS6P75HPE4L5XC6MKTRPKUOBVBS2/
