----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jason L Tibbitts III" <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> > To: "nicolas mailhot" <nicolas.mailhot@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: golang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Development discussions related to Fedora" <devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, > "Discussion of RPM packaging standards and practices for Fedora" <packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2018 6:00:24 PM > Subject: Re: Proposed Fedora packaging guideline: More Go packaging > > I wish this message wasn't crossposted everywhere, but I don't want to > lose any discussion by trimming the CC list. Sorry if replies generate > bounces for some. > > >>>>> "nm" == nicolas mailhot <nicolas.mailhot@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > nm> And the forge macros are now available since > nm> redhat-rpm-config-73-1.fc28 (I had missed the push due to upstream > nm> renaming the file). Heartfelt thanks to Jason Tibbitts ! > > Please don't forget to let me know when it's time to start thinking > about pushing this down to F27. And maybe F26. And as far as I can > tell it should work with only minor modification in EPEL7 (via > epel-rpm-macros). I don't know about EPEL6, but we really should look > at it given some of the other discussions about specfile compatibility. > Some packagers wouldn't ever use it if it doesn't work everywhere. > I think that it would be great to land it also in the EPEL6/7. JC > Finally, we should also talk about whether there is any integration or > automation possible between fedpkg and specfiles configured with these > macros. > > - J< > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > _______________________________________________ packaging mailing list -- packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to packaging-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
