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

[Bug 253557] Packaging mercurial extensions



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


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=253557





--- Comment #9 from Jonathan S. Shapiro <shap eros-os org>  2008-12-02 21:52:16 EDT ---
Okay. It's coming back to me. The situation was as follows:

1. At that time, the fedora package for HG was missing a bunch of stuff. I
wanted to package the missing bits, HOWEVER
2. I knew that several of those pieces were about to be merged upstream, SO
3. If I packaged them separately, it was important *not* to put them in hgext,
because if they got put there they would interfere with the later update of the
base HG package.

So to summarize, I think it would be useful if an hgext-like directory scheme
existed where upstream promised *not* to put things. I'll suggest it upstream
and see what the response is.

It also would have sufficed to have a systemwide hgext loaded, since that could
conceivably add load paths. This too was under discussion, but I got distracted
by other things.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.


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