On 5/22/06, Jonathan Underwood <jonathan.underwood@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
However, the rejected alternative would have had the package name emacs-foo, which contains the files for GNU emacs, with subpackages xemacs-foo and emacs-foo-common, if required (the current guideline seems to want a rename of emacs-auctex to emacs-common-auctex, even though the package is only built for GNU Emacs).
It would seem to me that if auctex is only usable for emacs (and not xemacs) then it would be named emacs-auctex. Simple as that. If auctex can be used for both emacs and xemacs then it would be called emacs-common-auctex. I'm not sure where the confusion lies? It seems to me you are over-thinking this issue, and trying to make it more complicated than it actually is. -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
