https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2417806
--- Comment #49 from Cristian Le <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Michal Hlavinka from comment #47) > but that's not a reason to have this argument all over again. I am obviously of a different opinion as I have been trying to understand your point of view and the technical aspects that you are concerned. We are taking all of your comments into consideration and are trying to address the issues you have, it would be polite if you did the same with our concerns so we can find an amicable common ground, instead of a silent treatment. Even being explicit that you are not interested in further discussion is a better response than no response. (In reply to Peter Oliver from comment #48) > > Just FYI, different packagers take different views on this, since using the > path rather than package name projects you against files moving between > packages, and because naming the executable is more explicit about what > functionality is being required. Ultimately, I’m relaxed about which style > we end up with. Indeed, I am equally fine with either approach if the packager knows the difference and potential issues between them. Using the package names gives you better control of the upgrade path of the dependencies, e.g. if one of the package gets converted to a compat package, that can often be forgotten. > (In reply to Cristian Le from comment #43) > > that is a decision for Fedora to make via ChangeProposals, > > I wonder if switching our traditional lesspipe.sh for the one from > lesspipe.org deserved a change proposal itself. I imagine that some people > will be surprised by it when they upgrade to Fedora 44. I am not familiar enough with the differences to judge, but from the vast change in test dependencies and support, I am leaning towards a yes. It does not seem like a simple change of sources and this change seemingly circumvented the package review process which as we can see here has uncovered quite a lot of differences in the packaging process compared to the bundled one. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2417806 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202417806%23c49 -- _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] 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/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/infra/tickets/issues/new
