On Thu, 2006-05-11 at 20:56 +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
> On 11/05/06, Christopher Stone <chris.stone@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > What's wrong with "emacs-common-muse"?
>
> Because that would be the package name, and the name appearing in
> bugzilla. Not easy for an xemacs-muse user with a bug to find and file
> a bug against.
And "emacsen-foo" is easier?
I think we're seriously over analyzing this. If we're consistent with
"emacs-common-foo" as "common addon packages that work with all bundled
emacs frontends", people will be able to find it. We could even have:
Provides: emacs-foo = %{version}-%{release}
Provides: xemacs-foo = %{version}-%{release}
inside the spec, so people doing "yum search" on the wrong name will
find it.
~spot
--
Tom "spot" Callaway: Red Hat Senior Sales Engineer || GPG ID: 93054260
Fedora Extras Steering Committee Member (RPM Standards and Practices)
Aurora Linux Project Leader: http://auroralinux.org
Lemurs, llamas, and sparcs, oh my!
--
fedora-extras-list mailing list
fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
