On 07/10/2012 07:29 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote: > Hi, > > I noticed that in revised haskell guidelines [1], there is mentioned the > ghc-rpm-macros package, which provides macros.ghc file, which in turns > provides some useful macros for packaging of Haskell packages. In Ruby, > we provide similar macro files in ruby-devel and rubygems-devel > subpackages respectively. Perl has their macros directly in the rpm > package itself. > > This seems to be a bit inconsistent to me. So my question is: shouldn't > we standardize some best practices with regards of RPM macros? For > example for Ruby, we placed the macros into -devel subpackages, because > we believe that it is just development dependency. Any opinions? Is this inconsistency causing problems? I think it is okay for the maintainers to make a call as to which package provides the macros, based on the specific environment. ~tom == Fedora Project -- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
