At FESCo's behest, I've drafted a change to the complex font templates so that they don't conflict with the macros must be expanded in the SRPM %description and summary: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fix_Complex_Font_Template(draft) This will get discussed at the next meeting but I'd love to see two pieces of input from the fonts SIG before that occurs. 1) Of the two methods, (I know both are disliked) which is the preferred method to the fonts SIG? Is there another method that would be preferable that does not leave an unexpanded macro in the SRPM %description? 2) If you want to make your case that the SRPM is of lesser importance than binary rpms so unexpanded macros that don't contain information that would be useful in the description anyway are allowed, please add it as another option for FPC to consider. -Toshio
Attachment:
pgpBytNFLTNnO.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
