Manoj Srivastava wrote: > And that, I think, may serve as a guiding criteria for whether > one should make a package native or not. With my native packages > (kernel-package, ucf, and devotee), I do not _have_ an upstrem process, > nor an upstream "distribution" or tarball; and thus there is no > difference in process for a packaging change or a feature addition -- > which makes it clear to me that these are native packages. Whenever you guys bring the argument of convenience to make a package native, I imagine that RedHat, Novell and company did the same with half of GNOME packages, and I had to look at Fedora and SuSE's pages checking for updates, report bugs in their bugzillas, look if a new upstream version only changed the spec file or also the code, and I want to cry myself to sleep. Emilio
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature