Dne 12. 11. 20 v 21:22 Adam Williamson napsal(a): > If you're going to have this kind of "upstream" spec file...well, I > wish you wouldn't. But if you do, *AT MINIMUM*, the "downstream" spec > files need to have a clear explanation that there is an "upstream" spec > file, with a justification as to why, and a link to it. At the very > top. Otherwise there is no chance any other Fedora packager is going to > find it.
This is actually a good idea. I have lots of such spec files. Is it a good idea to document this in Packaging Guidelines? Something like: If upstream provides SPEC files and your SPEC is a copy you should put on top of SPEC file: # This SPEC file is a copy from upstream http://www.upstream.org/foo.spec -- Miroslav Suchy, RHCA Red Hat, Associate Manager ABRT/Copr, #brno, #fedora-buildsys _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
