[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [fab] FSF Requirements for srpm provisions



On Thursday 02 November 2006 11:32, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> I'd prefer they have their own SRPMS, especially if they had to pull
> anything from -devel (which will get obsoleted from the download
> site soon.)
>
> Now, if they just want one big source ISO, that's fine.

What about the Fedora project case going forward?  A spin of Fedora being of 
both Core and Extras packages, user chosen (or in some cases project chosen) 
package set.  Does EACH spin have to ship the SRPMS used, or can all refer 
back to the SRPM pool at fedoraproject.org and its mirrors?

-- 
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora

Attachment: pgpisFS2fDPoI.pgp
Description: PGP signature


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]