(New page: Need update: Link to PackageReviewProcess missing, and there is no more fedora-packaging list) |
(Add %{_isa} into example for devel requires base package item) |
||
(5 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Need update: Link to PackageReviewProcess missing, and there is no more fedora-packaging list | 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? [[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]] |
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