rc040203 at freenet.de
Mon Apr 16 16:12:27 UTC 2007
On Mon, 2007-04-16 at 11:37 -0400, Robin Norwood wrote:
> I was waiting for feedback on the latest iteration of the perl spec file
> before proceeding, but I haven't really gotten any - I guess people are
> generally busy with their day jobs, etc.
> [3 proposals]
That's what I've been enforcing in recent reviews is users to BR those
perl(XX) modules their packages actually require when building.
The advantage of this approach would be long term stability, because
packages then would use their "real requirements" instead of rpm helper
"properties" (such as "perl-devel") between which "real requirements"
could be moved at any time.
> We need to pick one of those three options (or a better one) and
> communicate it to the Fedora community to proceed if we're going to use
> the new perl for F7.
One detail I am not yet clear about:
Shall Fedora be allowed to provide separate perl modules, which also are
available as separate CPAN packages, but so far have been built as part
of the main perl src.rpm?
If yes, how? What would be the restrictions on EVR?
More information about the Fedora-perl-devel-list