On Thu, 2008-03-20 at 22:09 -0500, Callum Lerwick wrote: > > On Fri, 2008-03-21 at 01:18 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > Fedora is about showcasing the latest technology, if each time a new technology > > is introduced, we have to wait months to get a packaging guideline for it, and > > all packages using the new technology are blocked on that, where does that > > leave us? > > I've always viewed guidelines as being a codification of best practices > that have been proven in production. With that in mind, the whole idea > of writing guidelines *before* packages have been put in to production > is completely backwards. The writing of new guidelines should go > hand-in-hand with the deployment of the first few "new technology" > packages. It shouldn't block it. The finalization and ratification > should happen *after* they have proven themselves in practice. Is this not what's being done? We had a bunch of OCaml packages, and then we wrote up guidelines for packaging them. We have a bunch of Java packages, and we're working on guidelines for those... Although I'm not sure I'd always agree with you anyway. Sometimes you _can_ plan ahead; it's not as if the problems which the guidelines serve to solve/avoid are are _entirely_ unpredictable. - dwmw2 -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
