On Wed, 2005-06-29 at 21:09 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote: > There may be ways around these, but I think it'll end up messy. > Splitting the SRPMs would be a much simpler approach, and I don't think > that the maintenance burden of doing that would be untolerable at all. Honestly? I agree. Even if it means we end up with two copies of the full source in two SRPMS. Unless someone is violently opposed to splitting the SRPMS as policy (and can come up with a way to resolve the unnecessary userland package bumps/rebuilds), thats what I'm inclined to adopt. ~spot -- Tom "spot" Callaway: Red Hat Sales Engineer || GPG Fingerprint: 93054260 Fedora Extras Steering Committee Member (RPM Standards and Practices) Aurora Linux Project Leader: http://auroralinux.org Lemurs, llamas, and sparcs, oh my! -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
