On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 10:44 PM Orion Poplawski <orion@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Background - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1878306 > > conda can provide an /etc/fish/conf.d/conda.fish file for fish users. > As usual, we do not want to add a dependency on fish for conda. For now > I think I'll just have conda own /etc/fish and /etc/fish/conf.d, but > what do we want to do going forward? Add it to filesystem? Create a > fish-filesystem package? > > Surprisingly, I can't find any other packages that ship > /etc/fish/conf.d/* files, so maybe this just isn't an issue worth taking > on yet. > Fish actually has a vendor path in /usr/share, this is used in the nano-default-editor package, and is probably the right place for what you want to ship. But it probably makes sense if people are going to start shipping fish things to start having either a fish-filesystem package or just simply adding it to filesystem so that it's centrally owned (like we did for bash completion and others). -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! _______________________________________________ packaging mailing list -- packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to packaging-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
