[Fedora-packaging] Is "ascii" a valid package name?
rc040203 at freenet.de
Tue Oct 20 16:57:47 UTC 2009
On 10/20/2009 06:29 PM, Jon Ciesla wrote:
> Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>> On 10/20/2009 05:15 PM, Martin Gieseking wrote:
>>> Am 19.10.2009 19:15, schrieb Ralf Corsepius:
>>>> On 10/19/2009 06:34 PM, Martin Gieseking wrote:
>>  This package seems around since 1990, nobody seems to have missed
>> since then and appears to be poorly supported by its upstream (Last
>> update in 2005, despite it has no reasonable build-system/Makefiles)
> Not to bikeshed, but it's also tiny. Since you won't be maintaining it,
> don't have to review it and don't have to install it, what's that harm
> in it's inclusion?
The actual harm is "waste of resources".
However, my actual points behind this:
Is Fedora supposed to be a "hardly useful" packages cult which adopts
any package? Provided the quality of certain packages and how certain
reviews are being performed, at least I can't deny this thought.
More information about the Fedora-packaging