[Bug 181404] Review Request: emacs-muse

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Tue Apr 25 18:04:04 UTC 2006


Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: emacs-muse


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181404





------- Additional Comments From jonathan.underwood at gmail.com  2006-04-25 14:03 EST -------
My feeling is that, while what Akira is suggesting has merit, what it's
ultimately an attempt to do is to bend rpm to deal with installation from source
(.el) rather than binary.. it's not so dissimilar to gentoos ebuilds etc.  It
really seems like trying to get rpm to do things it wasn't designed to do. I'm
in favour of keeping things simple, working with binary packages, and not aiming
for the canonical solution. 

Pragmatically though, we can't move to using a emacsen-common like approach
until someone steps forward to do the necessary work, and I can't really see
that happening unless the solution is applicable to more than emacs lisp packages. 

[On a tangent though, if there was a mechanism for installing an rpm of source
files (be they .el, python modules, C, or whaterver) and having builds triggered
by installation of other packages, that'd be a really nice way to install a
kernel module package that autobuilt every time the kernel was updated. However,
again this is clearly a different model than rpm was designed for as it's based
on sources management, not binaries. I suppose Conary might have capability akin
to this]

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.




More information about the Fedora-package-review mailing list