RFC: Explicit Requires without comments

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hello everyone!

Can we please enhance the packaging guidelines and request packagers to
add comments to explicit Requires more often than not?

Explicit Requires on package names are fragile. The contents of the
required package may move to a different (sub)package.

Uncommented Requires don't give a hint about why they have been added and
what inside a package is needed (with obvious exceptions, such as one
Python based package requiring another Python based package). What inside
a package is required? An executable? A directory? A datadir? A DBus
service? JavaScript files?

There's just
  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Explicit_Requires
but it focuses on library deps and in particular specific versions.

What do you think?
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging





[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite Forum]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux