[Fedora-packaging] Three drafts

[Toshio Kuratomi]

I've updated the Explicit Requires draft with feedback from FESCo.  It
makes the guideline only apply to library Requires:

  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/ExplicitRequires
===

Source URL section that deals with upstream URLs that are not parsable
by rpmbuild:

  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Troublesome_source_URLs
===

Section to be added to package naming and linked to Conflicts Guidelines
about when upstream has used generic names for a package.

  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Common_package_names

Patrice has linked me to a similar section in the Packaging Tricks
section.  if someone would like to merge the rationale from there, that
would be helpful.  Otherwise I'll try to get to it later this week.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Packaging_Tricks#Use_of_common_namespace

-Toshio

-------------- 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/20090222/a55541ab/attachment.sig>