Explicit requires vs. auto library requires, and fc3/devel versioning

Rex Dieter rdieter at math.unl.edu
Mon Mar 21 13:52:38 UTC 2005

Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 14:24 +0100, Dag Wieers wrote:

>>>IMO, disttags are the easiest way to accomplish this. (and further, IMO,
>>>extras should *always* use dist tags, but I doubt that will happen)

> The reason I tried to hash through a disttag standard on the -packaging
> list was so that people who wanted to use them could have a unified
> method of doing so.

Fabulous.  That's a start.  Looks like another list I need to join.

> However, as long as I'm still breathing, it will never be mandatory.

If a package in Extras is for only 1 FC release, I'd agree with you.

However, I, and pretty much everyone I know who maintains add-on 
repositories that support multiple rh/rhel/fc releases, feel strongly 
about disttags (or in the very least *use* them): distags are (should 
be) neccesary, add value, and don't hurt anything.

-- Rex

More information about the fedora-extras-list mailing list