[Fedora-packaging] README.Dist is preferrable to README.Fedora

Ralf Corsepius rc040203 at freenet.de
Sun Oct 26 04:12:12 UTC 2008

On Sun, 2008-10-26 at 00:41 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 12:38:21AM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> > 
> > I have one now: README.package.
> Agreed, I also think that it is the best one. I have updated
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Packaging_Tricks#Avoiding_using_fedora_or_redhat_.28controversial.29
> (and I have explicitely stated that it is controversial).
I don't think it's controversial. You (or whoever wrote this) made it

Do you really think. users finding a README.Fedora are not able to bring
such a README into the appropriate context e.g. on EPEL or on RHEL?

Pedantic packagers could rename such a file (as part of their rpm.specs)
for EPEL or when adopting a package into RHEL. I for one, don't see much
reason to do so.


More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list