Re: Emacs packaging guidelines (was: Re: Fedora minimal installations)

2015-07-29 Thread Michael Schwendt
On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 20:12:56 +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote: > >> >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Emacs for more detail." > >> > And once again the wording is weak. It says "should". Three times even. > >> What's wrong with the word "should"? What am I missing? Seems like the > >> usu

Re: Emacs packaging guidelines (was: Re: Fedora minimal installations)

2015-07-29 Thread Jonathan Underwood
On 29 July 2015 at 20:08, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 08:03:00PM +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote: >> >> "The Emacs add-on packaging guidelines no longer stipulate that packages >> >> which >> >> also bundle support for Emacs should split out those Emacs files into >> >> separ

Re: Emacs packaging guidelines (was: Re: Fedora minimal installations)

2015-07-29 Thread Matthew Miller
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 08:03:00PM +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote: > >> "The Emacs add-on packaging guidelines no longer stipulate that packages > >> which > >> also bundle support for Emacs should split out those Emacs files into > >> separate > >> sub-packages. This package should instead ship

Re: Emacs packaging guidelines (was: Re: Fedora minimal installations)

2015-07-29 Thread Jonathan Underwood
On 29 July 2015 at 18:42, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 18:53:27 +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote: > >> "The Emacs add-on packaging guidelines no longer stipulate that packages >> which >> also bundle support for Emacs should split out those Emacs files into >> separate >> sub-packages.

Emacs packaging guidelines (was: Re: Fedora minimal installations)

2015-07-29 Thread Michael Schwendt
On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 18:53:27 +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote: > "The Emacs add-on packaging guidelines no longer stipulate that packages which > also bundle support for Emacs should split out those Emacs files into separate > sub-packages. This package should instead ship those files with the main > pac