[Fedora-packaging] file-not-utf8 complaints

Toshio Kuratomi a.badger at gmail.com
Sun Jun 1 17:17:32 UTC 2008

Patrice Dumas wrote:
> On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 04:09:25PM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>> However, the flipside of this is if a program has an xml config file  
>> that the user is expected to edit manually in a text editor and the  
>> program will adapt to multiple encodings (for instance, by using libxml2  
>> to parse the file[1]_) having it exist in utf-8 is much better than  
>> having it exist in SOME_EXOTIC_ENCODING.  In this case it's the program  
> I disagree. It is not an obvious choice and should be left to the
> maintainer. It depends on the user target of the software, for instance.
Please state your counter example.  I'm laying out the parameters by 
which we could relax the current rule.  If we don't lay out the 
boundaries correctly the replacement rule will end up still being too 


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/attachments/20080601/76c3c3e4/attachment.sig>

More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list