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: report-mirror - Fedora MirrorManager client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445126
------- Additional Comments From rc040203(a)freenet.de 2008-05-15 12:00 EST -------
(In reply to comment #10)
I haven't had time to package the rest of MM (it's going to
require some patches
to make it comply to the TurboGears packaging standard). I just noticed someone
else CC'ed themselves to this review. Would it be an issue to stub out an MM
package, and just have the 'client' subpackage for now?
That's up to
you. Does the client without a server make any sense?
The newer package would
have a later NVR, wouldn't have to dead.package and block this one, and all in
all a cleaner solution.
This won't fly, if the "client" and the
"server" share the same upstream source
tarball (and thus src.rpm-package-name).
In this case, it's much easier to build everything from this one tarball and to
gradually add subpackages being built from a common tarball "when they are
ready". ... or (and preferred) resubmit your package when you have "finished
packaging" and consider it "done" ... It's what almost all other
contributors do.
Or must the entire thing be packaged at once?
That's the
preferred way. The real decision however is tied to
"upstream", whether they ship one single tarball or several tarballs.
--
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, or are watching someone who is.