On 29/3/02 8:24 AM, "Max Horn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 16:09 Uhr -0500 28.03.2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> Max, >> >> I can understand your position and respect the desire not to >> dilute the Fink policy unless absolutely positively necessary, even >> if-- in this one case-- I disagree. >> >> And I *fully* support your proposal regarding a third party >> section. I actually have a few Fink packages I have put together >> that will never be accepted because they completely violate policy; >> the most notable being the Jode package (as it installs a binary). >> >> It would be nice if there was a mechanism for injecting a >> hunk of .info files into fink; ones that are completely unsupported >> or totally local. > > Prolly, yeah. One idea would be to use yet another tree for it, say > "thirdparty" or so. Writing some inject scripts wouldn't be hard, and > we could also write a tool to add this to fink.conf (if you think > it's not enough to explain to users how to make that change). > > > Max
How about 'contrib'? That's what Debian uses, although I'm not sure if it's for the same purposes... _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
