Le samedi 11 octobre 2008 à 21:35 -0400, Braden McDaniel a écrit : > On Sun, 2008-10-12 at 01:19 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > I wonder if we shouldn't even start treating generated autotools files the same > > way as binary JARs (for which the packaging guidelines mandate that they have > > to be removed and rebuilt from source). They're all generated files. > > Probably the reason there is no guideline treating all generated files > the same way is that doing so is a really dumb idea. Probably the reason there is no guideline treating all generated files the same way is some groups of packagers are lazier than others. See, I can make inflamatory comments too. IMHO there is no reason to allow any pre-generated file except when the generating chain is not packaged in Fedora. As Kevin wrote refusing to re-generate files because of peotential breakage is only papering over tool bugs. Also it's legaly borderline for everything which is (L)GPL. -- Nicolas Mailhot
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
