Re: unversioned upstream source

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: "Discussion related to Fedora Extras" <fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Patrice Dumas" <pertusus@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: unversioned upstream source
From: "Mike McGrath" <mmcgrath@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 17:41:15 -0500
Cc:
In-reply-to: <20060710160719.GC5455@xxxxxxx>
References: <20060710160719.GC5455@xxxxxxx>
Reply-to: Discussion related to Fedora Extras <fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx>

What do you think about that issue? What do you think is best practice
and why?

--
Pat


I'd say best practice is to query upstream and ask them to start
providing a version.

      -Mike

--
fedora-extras-list mailing list
fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list

Follow-Ups:
- Re: unversioned upstream source
  - From: Peter Gordon

References:
- unversioned upstream source
  - From: Patrice Dumas

Prev by Date: Re: Recapitulate the current state of Fedora Extras and some ideas to make it better
Next by Date: Re: unversioned upstream source
Previous by thread: unversioned upstream source
Next by thread: Re: unversioned upstream source
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Fedora General Discussion] [Fedora Art] [Fedora Docs] [Fedora Package Review] [Fedora Desktop] [Big List of Linux Books] [Yosemite Backpacking] [KDE Users]

Powered by Linux