Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Spiffy https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=183028 ------- Additional Comments From rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx 2006-02-27 09:59 EST ------- (In reply to comment #14) > Mid-air collission - I'm replying to Ralf here. > > Consider the case of adding another package implementing "webserver". Yes, ... RH's responsibility, bad design on their part. However, there is a substantial difference between "webserver" and "perl(mixin)" "webserver" is a virtual package/property, perl(mixin) is a 1:1 correspondence to mixin.pm. > So we > have two packages providing the same thing. The "mixin" functionality you get > depends on which package you 'use'. Exactly. > You could never use that package and this > one in the same Perl program because they would conflict at the language level. > What perl packages provide and which conflict with each other doesn't simply > map onto RPM dependencies. It does. perl(xxx) is the file dependency on xxx.pm with the %vendor*/%perl* cruft removed. > BTW, please quote the place in the review policy where the process of vetoing > reviews is laid out. I would like to know how it works, but I can't find it. FE doesn't have a policy of vetoing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
