On Tue, 2008-05-27 at 23:49 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 04:41:23PM -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > > >>>>> "PD" == Patrice Dumas <pertusus@xxxxxxx> writes: > > > > PD> It is, although shipping different packages in one (with different > > PD> release schedules, tarballs, authors etc.) is bad > > PD> practice. Normally this is raised during reviews, but not here. > > > > Well, this was explained in the review ticket: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=167376 > > > > "This package is a bit odd. To avoid circular dependencies, I've > > bundled DateTime, DateTime::Locale, and DateTime::TimeZone." > > > > I'm not sure of the best way to avoid those circular dependencies, but > > surely bundling a few closely related and very small modules is low on > > the hierarchy of packaging sins. > > I think that it is perfectly right, in fact. > > > PD> I suggest that you open a bug against perl-DateTime. > > > > Not sure what good it would do, given the above. > > Indeed, sorry, I missed the explanation. > Problem is, the explanation is a bit bunk. The reason I'm even here is because I'm getting the package via EPEL, and it conflicts with the DAG/rpmforge packaging, which does use three separate packages (quite successfully - I've been living with DAG/rpmforge for years happily, and only recently got into the EPEL business). So the question is: is there a 'yummy' way to make a package which bundles all three perl CPAN tarballs 'Obsolete' one which is packaged as three separate ones... and vice-versa I suppose. I'm trying to find a way to make DAG/rpmforge and EPEL play nice (for perl-DateTime). Any ideas? Thanks, David -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
