From Fedora Project Wiki

Revision as of 03:20, 21 December 2008 by Wikibot (talk | contribs) (Packaging/Minutes20060629 moved to Packaging:Minutes20060629: Moving Packaging Pages to Packaging Namespace)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Fedora Packaging Committee Meeting of {2006-06-29}


  • AxelThimm (thimm)
  • DavidLutterkort (lutter)
  • JasonTibbitts (tibbs)
  • JesseKeating (f13)
  • JoseOliveira (jpo)
  • RalfCorsepius (racor)
  • RexDieter (rdieter)
  • TomCallaway (spot)
  • ToshioKuratomi (abadger1999)
  • VilleSkyttä (scop)


  • All members in attendance, except Michael Schwendt, who has not yet accepted (or declined) the invitation to join.
  • It was agreed that all decisions by the Fedora Packaging Committee would be decided by a majority vote of 6. Thus, a 6 member quorum is required. If the committee adds/removes members, the quorum amount will be revisited.
  • The moderator (TomCallaway) started going through the list of open issues found here: Packaging/GuidelinesTodo
  • On the first issue, libexecdir, the Committee voted to add text to the Guidelines permitting the use of %{_libexecdir} in Fedora packages even though it is not currently part of the FHS. The issue passed with 6 yes votes, 0 no votes, 4 members abstaining.
  • The Committee also voted to recommend that subdirs be used in %_libexecdir where upstream shows no clear preference. Ultimately, the use of subdirs in %{_libexecdir} is at the packager's discretion. The issue passed with 7 yes votes, 0 no votes, 3 members abstaining.
  • AxelThimm agreed to take the issue of including libexecdir to the FHS on behalf of the Fedora Packaging Committee.
  • TomCallaway agreed to write up the libexecdir changes.
  • On the issue of mono guidelines, the Committee discussed the confusing (and frightening) nature of mono packages at length, and ultimately voted to standardize mono packages as architecture specific packages that put their files under %{_libdir}/%{name}. The issue passed with 8 yes votes, 0 no votes, 2 members abstaining.
  • On the issue of ruby guidelines, the Committee discussed the draft guidelines, and voted to approve them as formal guidelines and lift the hold on ruby packages. The issue passed with 6 yes votes, 0 no votes, 4 members abstaining.
  • On the issue of php guidelines, the Committee discussed the draft guidelines. It was noted that there are still several key open issues around the PHP guidelines. A vote was taken to approve the existing guidelines, and this vote failed, with 5 yes votes, 0 no votes, and 5 members abstaining. This issue was tabled, and put on the agenda for next week. JasonTibbs and TomCallaway were tasked with resolving the open issues with the PHP guidelines.
  • As a result of the PHP guidelines not being approved, a moratorium was placed on all php packages. JasonTibbs announced this on the fedora-extras and fedora-maintainers lists.