Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=567542 --- Comment #5 from Marcela Mašláňová <mmaslano@xxxxxxxxxx> 2010-03-15 03:23:31 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) > One thing I was going to suggest, is that it might make sense to break > /usr/bin/cpanm out into its own wholly-owned subpackage "cpanm", much like > perl-App-Asciio has asciio, perl-App-Nopaste has nopaste, etc. This would > allow users to easily differentiate between something that looks like "just > another library", as well as to have a sensible entry in comps for it. I solved it by 'Provides: cpanminus'. Some reviewers won't accept "useles" sub-package. I'm personally not sure about this split either. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review