| |||||||||||||
On properly packaging perlOn properly packaging perlPosted Aug 22, 2009 1:58 UTC (Sat) by MattPerry (guest, #46341)In reply to: On properly packaging perl by khc Parent article: On properly packaging perl
So? That sounds like a problem that could be fixed.
(Log in to post comments)
On properly packaging perl Posted Aug 22, 2009 6:18 UTC (Sat) by bojan (subscriber, #14302) [Link]
Not likely. The moment upstream does something like link in a library that some distro doesn't like, you'd have flame war on your hands. Or the opposite - if it doesn't link it in. Etc., etc.
The upstream packages are raw materials. Distros peruse them to make a meaningful components for their system.
On properly packaging perl Posted Aug 24, 2009 6:20 UTC (Mon) by nevyn (subscriber, #33129) [Link]
So fix it then, if it's such an easy problem.
Except you might want to search for zero-install/autopackage/etc. where people have tried already ... and failed.
Or ask upstream developers why they don't ask for maintainership of their packages in (at least) Debian/Fedora[/EPEL].
On properly packaging perl Posted Aug 29, 2009 19:05 UTC (Sat) by dirtyepic (subscriber, #30178) [Link]
It is fixed. Upstreams already have multiple teams of dedicated people packaging their software for distros. They're called distros.
|
|||||||||||||