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

Patrice Dumas pertusus at free.fr
Sun Oct 26 16:44:18 UTC 2008

On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 10:43:28AM -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> >>>>> "PD" == Patrice Dumas <pertusus at free.fr> writes:
> PD> But is it fedora specific, or specific to the setup of the
> PD> package?
> Now you're just being obtuse.  I wrote the package _for_ Fedora.  It's

That's exactly my point. It is written for fedora, but is not specific
of fedora. That's why I think it is better to avoid using fedora, but
instead use a word, both more neutral and more appropriate, like

> a Fedora package.  The information is specific to the default
> configuration of the package in Fedora.  The apache configuration file
> in my example doesn't come from upstream; it is part of the Fedora
> package.  README.Fedora is an entirely appropriate name for a file
> explaining that.

It is appropriate, but README.package seems more appropriate to me,
since it is part of the package and it allows to reuse it in other
contexts without having to rename anything (reuse in EPEL, in 3rd party
repo, for local builds and local repository or 'private' repositories
accessible on the web...).


More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list