On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 12:06:23AM +0200, Erik van Pienbroek wrote:
While reviewing mingw32-gstreamer  I've stumbled upon a
where more feedback is appreciated. The packager has based this package
upon the native gstreamer package. While there's nothing wrong with that
approach I have my doubts whether some things are okay in respect to the
Fedora and Fedora-MinGW packaging guidelines.
The native gstreamer package consists of a main package and two
subpackages, -devel and -tools.
As no packages in the Fedora-MinGW toolchain have -devel subpackages
(everything is a library) the packager decided to comment out all the
-devel subpackage parts in the .spec file.
While this makes the .spec
file harder to read the packager has indicated that he prefers to keep
the commented out parts for easier merging with native changes. Doesn't
this conflict with the Legibility-rule  in the Fedora packaging
I'd say it's not great to keep all the commented out lines, but I
wouldn't necessarily block the review for it. It depends on how much
you trust the packager to do the right thing.
The -tools package contains just some .exe files. Are such packages
containing only binaries welcome in our Fedora-MinGW project? If so, is
it okay to put them in separate subpackages or should they be moved to
the main package?
They're OK as long as they are development tools, and in this case
they look like mostly development tools, so I would say this is OK.
Richard Jones, Emerging Technologies, Red Hat http://et.redhat.com/~rjones
libguestfs lets you edit virtual machines. Supports shell scripting,
bindings from many languages. http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/libguestfs/
See what it can do: http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/libguestfs/recipes.html