On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 06:26:35PM +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote: > On Friday 21 March 2008, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > > I've added another draft to the todo list: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/NoBitsInSrv > > > > I doubt we'll get to it on Tuesday, but we'll get to it eventually. > > If this passes, it needs a statement what to do with packages that already > use /srv in a way that conflicts with the draft. /srv/foo is typically data, > potentially lots and lots of it, so auto-migrations are practically out of > the question and manual ones are possibly nontrivial amounts of admin work. > Therefore I'd suggest letting them stay as is. Which packages are these? Maybe they can check whether they are being upgraded (from a package evr polluting /srv) or freshly installed. In the latter case they should behave as every other package, e.g. not assume anything about /srv. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpTvnpvhHKBo.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
