Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > Besides, the cost is pretty close to zero (not even any new packages > if the files are placed in redhat-rpm-config) so I don't see the need > here. I do, however, disagree with the practice of having an > unbounded number of packages we have to stuff in the buildroot, each > containing one macro file. > > In the currently running FPC meeting proposed having fedora-rpm-macros > or fedora-rpm-config or something where we can collect these. We had GNAT_arches in redhat-rpm-config for a while. Then we needed to add GPRbuild_arches. Panu didn't want the maintenance burden, so he asked us to move the macros to a separate package. Thus gnat-srpm-macros was created, which has the advantage that we who maintain Ada packages also maintain the relevant macros, so we can update the architecture lists without troubling anyone else. Would everyone who needs to edit one of these macros be made co-maintainer of the collection package? Or are there people who are willing to make changes on request? Enough such people to always be responsive? Björn Persson
Attachment:
pgpVJkJYRP5dT.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signatur
-- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
