On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 12:21:15PM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> On Friday, 18 September 2020 at 11:22, Petr Pisar wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 12:51:46PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > > Sooooo: RH Java packagers, what if you build these packages as non-modular
> > > (maybe using some scripting to make it happen at the same time as modular
> > > builds?) and add a readme explaining their maintenance state?
> >
> > Do you mean literally a README file under /usr/share/doc/${PACAKGE}/
> > directory? That won't work, because nobody looks there.
>
> I do. :)
>
> What about https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/<name>/blob/master/f/README.md ?
>
Do you think that package users consult dist-git before reporting a bug?
I think the idea with a template in Bugzilla was better.
Moreover that file was supposed to display a source package description on all
possible places (and originally was supposed to automatically updated from SRPM
packages, but that was never implemented).
At the end a packager can put the notice into %description of the spec file.
I sometimes document there how the files are distributed among the subpcackages.
-- Petr
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
