On Sat, Mar 03, 2007 at 08:32:17PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Le samedi 03 mars 2007 à 20:14 +0100, Axel Thimm a écrit : > > On Sat, Mar 03, 2007 at 09:28:45AM -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > > On Sat, 2007-03-03 at 09:35 -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > > > > If it's 100% process it should be in Extras/ rather than Packaging/ ... > > > So no need to get it approved by the Packaging Committee -- just needs > > > to find a good home under Extras/ > > > > could you perhaps extend it to mention firmwares and fonts as further > > examples for package that should not carry %dists and be the same > > cross-distribution (and also handled the same)? > > Please don't - fontconfig logic can be very different from distribution > to distribution and release to release, fonts are *not* a good > cross-distribution candidate unless you want to promote gigantic > scriptlets OK, withdrawing fonts, then, I thought that it would had settled by now. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpHxsFMjUUBV.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
