On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 10:42 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>
>> Maybe I don't understand what is meant by metadata, but I don't
>> understand why we can't provide the same metadata as autotools
>
> Likewise, *this* I do not understand. In what way does autotools
> *provide* metadata? I can underst
Maybe I don't understand what is meant by metadata, but I don't
understand why we can't provide the same metadata as autotools
Likewise, *this* I do not understand. In what way does autotools
*provide* metadata? I can understand that it *uses* certain metadata,
but it doesn't *provide* them...
2009/3/29 "Martin v. Löwis" :
>> I think that each OS community should maintain its own tool, that complies
>> to the OS standard (wich has its own evolution cycle)
>>
>> Of course this will be possible as long as Distutils let the system
>> packager find/change the metadata in an easy way.
>
> In
I think that each OS community should maintain its own tool, that complies
to the OS standard (wich has its own evolution cycle)
Of course this will be possible as long as Distutils let the system
packager find/change the metadata in an easy way.
In the specific case of RPMs, I still think that
