Updates to Packaging Guidelines

[Jonathan Underwood]

On 22/05/06, Christopher Stone <chris.stone at gmail.com> wrote:
> It would seem to me that if auctex is only usable for emacs (and not
> xemacs) then it would be named emacs-auctex.  Simple as that.   If
> auctex can be used for both emacs and xemacs then it would be called
> emacs-common-auctex.  I'm not sure where the confusion lies?

That's not what the guideline says. That's (part of) the problem. The
guideline specifically insists that emacs-auctex be renamed to
emacs-common-auctex (go read it and see).

>
> It seems to me you are over-thinking this issue, and trying to make it
> more complicated than it actually is.

Yes, I did over think it. Then I realized what the simple solution was
(see the emacs-muse.spec). Unfortunately, I made other people over
think it too in the process. I suck :)

The problem is that the Guideline is unecessarily complicated, when a
much simpler and logical alternative exists.

J.