Docs meeting 2009-02-11 Summary

[Paul W. Frields]

On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 04:51:40PM +1000, Christopher Curran wrote:
> Christopher Curran wrote:
>> Karsten Wade wrote:
>>>       * ACTION: quaid to work on the Fedora v. RHEL packaging
>>>           standards question -- are they equivalent or approximate.
>>>
>>>
>>>   
>> Standards? Really? What about phpPgAdmin? or python-sexy? or  
>> perl-Net-LibIDN? or PyKDE4?
>>
>> Do they all follow the 'standards' too? Can I have a link to where the  
>> fedora standard is documented with rules prohibiting anything other  
>> than characters which don't work?
>>
> FYI: I am a fedora package maintainer, I'm interested to see where the  
> rules differ. I would like that link for further reference.

I'm confused as to your actual question above.  But in any case, the
package review guidelines start here:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines

-- 
Paul W. Frields                                http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
  http://redhat.com/   -  -  -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
  irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/attachments/20090217/46845695/attachment.sig>