potential candidates for contribution

[Rudolf Kastl]

Am Donnerstag, den 17.03.2005, 10:33 +0100 schrieb Iago Rubio:
> On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 09:33 +0100, Rudolf Kastl wrote:
> > Am Donnerstag, den 17.03.2005, 02:04 -0500 schrieb Ignacio Vazquez-
> > Abrams:
> > > On Wed, 2005-03-16 at 23:01 +0100, Rudolf Kastl wrote:
> > > > 1. trigger - 3d rallye game. 
> > > 
> > > physfs not available from Core or Extras.
> > 
> > available in newrpms see link above
> 
> You should then advocate for the addition of dependencies and then to
> the addition of the programs itself.
> 
> > > Doesn't use $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%buildroot consistently.
> > 
> > is that really an issue?
> 
> It's in the Packaging Guidelines, so yes it's an issue.
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#head-
> d0ada6130cf40be1244d34cc44fc38d34dd00db8

ya i just asked that question for the trivial reason that doesnt make a
difference at all besides some aestetic value ;).
id see more sense if one of the styles would be preferred else its a mix
up again repo wide. 

> 
> [snip]
> 
> > > > 3. flightgear - 3d flight simulator
> > > 
> > > simgear not available from Core or Extras.
> > available from newrpms see above
> 
> I really don't think the availability of a dependency on newrpms have
> anything to do with Fedora Extras.
> 
> As I said, I think it will be much better to add first those
> dependencies to Extras, as without them the packages you mentioned are
> useless and should not be added.


librarys without applications are as useless as applications without
librarys. So i thought if  youd add a library you need a reason for
adding the library? or am i wrong?

If you read the initial mail the dependencys are part of the whole deal.
maybe i should list em too... thought that was trivial.

regards,
rudolf kastl