At 9:38 PM +0100 2005-06-14, Andy Heath wrote:
> The issue it raises is maintenance. If FC does
> it differently then it means users are
> dependent on FC providing updated packages
> or working hard to manually do that mapping
> with updated code.
> Effectively it becomes an FC package not
> a general one but the developers are not
> part of FC.
Correct. They have produced their binary package version, and
they need to keep up-to-date with that. My experience is that
they've done a pretty good job in that department.
Of course, any support issues that come up that are specific to
their binary package version is something that they will need to
support. Again, RedHat seems to have done a pretty good job in that
respect -- witness John's presence on the mailman-users mailing list,
and his frequent posts.
At this point, I'm much more unhappy with the kind of crap we've
seen from CPanel and Apple.
> Is there guidance in the standard mailman distributions
> on how to build for FC starting with a tar.gz ?
According to their particular filesystem structure? No. That is
something that RedHat would need to produce -- and support.
--
Brad Knowles, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania
Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755
SAGE member since 1995. See <http://www.sage.org/> for more info.
------------------------------------------------------
Mailman-Users mailing list
Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Security Policy:
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp
