Hello,
I would like to ask you about splitting package xmlto.
I got request to split xmlto package to throw away passivetex (and TeX)
requirements in the case of xmlto usage for building txt/html
documentation (rhbz #454341). This change is reasonable, but I'm not
sure which way is better. Generally I have two possibilities:
1) Split to xmlto and xmlto-base - with xmlto Requires: xmlto-base . In
xmlto-base all binaries, documentation and backends without passivetex
requirements. Main package will contain only three backends (fo to
dvi/ps/pdf) after that change. This will not break any builds in Fedora
Rawhide but raises rpmlint warnings about no binary/documentation in
main package.
2) Split to xmlto and xmlto-tex . This will break builds which are using
xmlto for building pdf/ps/dvi documentation - additional BuildRequires
for xmlto-tex backends subpackage will be required.
Which one should be preferred?
I like the possibility #1 a bit more, although I guess in long-term is
#2 better solution. Any other ideas?
Thanks in advance for reactions.
Greetings,
Ondrej Vasik
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Toto je =?UTF-8?Q?digit=C3=A1ln=C4=9B?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_podepsan=E1?= =?UTF-8?Q?_=C4=8D=C3=A1st?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_zpr=E1vy?=
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
