Packaging talk:ReviewGuidelines

From FedoraProject

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Add %{_isa} into example for devel requires base package item)
 
(4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
  
 
The fedora-packaging list still exists! https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging -[[User:Spot]]
 
The fedora-packaging list still exists! https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging -[[User:Spot]]
 +
 +
Should use "permissible", not "permissable". --[[User:nphilipp]]
 +
 +
Are there guidelines in there against the inclusion of trivial stuff? [[User:Fche|Fche]] 23:24, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 +
 +
The ''devel requires base package'' example does not reflect ''%{_isa}'' modifier introduced by new guide lines. --[[User:ppisar]]

Latest revision as of 17:04, 15 February 2011

Need update: Link to PackageReviewProcess missing, and there is no more fedora-packaging list

The fedora-packaging list still exists! https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging -User:Spot

Should use "permissible", not "permissable". --User:nphilipp

Are there guidelines in there against the inclusion of trivial stuff? Fche 23:24, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

The devel requires base package example does not reflect %{_isa} modifier introduced by new guide lines. --User:ppisar