On Thu, 2006-09-14 at 14:32 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 06:03:58 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > > On Wed, 2006-09-13 at 19:42 -0700, Chris Weyl wrote: > > > On 9/13/06, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > > > On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 23:43:35 +0200, Denis Leroy wrote: > > > > > > > > > But yeah, probably not worth the effort. I don't see much wrong with > > > > > having /usr/include/CORE around either... > > > > > > > > Except that the name is very generic and hence short-sighted. > > > > Agreed, it's very short-sighted, because "CORE" is not unlikely to > > conflict with "core dump files" on certain systems or with "CORE-files" > > an OS provides. > > > > > Isn't that an upstream issue? Do we have an actual conflict in /usr/include? > The review process not only asks reviewers to check a list of MUST/SHOULD > items. It also asks reviewers to take a look at an RPM package. If the > reviewer finds pitfalls or forms of ugly packaging, it sometimes leads to > a feeling like "well, sure, the packager managed to wrap the software into > an RPM package or many, but I'm not fond of the spec or the binaries and > hence I wouldn't feel good when approving this". Exactly, that's why I am occasionally bothering submitters with "I am not going to approve this package", for reasons beyond the guidelines (In most cases: program design or (lack of) code quality) and why I am occasionally requesting/demanding people to "think about what they are doing" and not to "act as coding monkeys". CGAL/CORE is such a case. I would not have approved it and consider it "to have made it through the cracks of the review process". > This is because the review system is not bullet-proof in that it > covers all possible packaging issues. It is not that if a package > meets the guidelines it is "perfect" and forward-looking. Just encountered another such case: A package wants to ship /usr/include/extensions https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=201000 Ralf -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
