Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: poppler-extras - PDF rendering library extras (qt/qt4) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218768 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |[EMAIL PROTECTED] ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-08 04:15 EST ------- Rex- > # yes, this file is owned by 2 packages, deal. -- Rex http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines?highlight=%28Packaging%29#head-a5931a7372c4a00065713430984fa5875513e6d4 Packages must not own files already owned by other packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first package to be installed should own the files that other packages may rely upon. This means, for example, that no package in Fedora should ever share ownership with any of the files owned by the filesystem or man package. If you feel that you have a good reason to own a file or that another package owns, then please present that at package review time. I think this is meant more to address having entirely different packages owning the same file, rather than a collection of related packages sharing a file, but I thought I'd get your take on it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
