From Fedora Project Wiki

  • ...e and GPL-Compatible. Since it is usually only found in "configure" files, packagers should be sure to only include this License tag if the binary package conta ...ense it is derived from, it is usually only found in "configure" files, so packagers should be sure to only include this License tag if the binary package conta
    2 KB (258 words) - 19:50, 12 November 2012
  • The Koji Build System is Fedora's buildsystem for Fedora 7 and beyond. Packagers use the koji client to request package builds and get information about the ...is an alias in Makefile.common to request koji builds. This enables Fedora packagers to simply cd into the appropriate branch of a package (from a cvs checkout)
    2 KB (358 words) - 21:12, 25 May 2008
  • == Packagers/Reviewers/People interested ==
    3 KB (461 words) - 13:53, 18 September 2016
  • Fedora's rpm includes a macro for libexecdir, <code>%{_libexecdir}</code>. Packagers are highly encouraged to store libexecdir files in a package-specific subdi Fedora's rpm includes a macro for libexecdir, <code>%{_libexecdir}</code>. Packagers are highly encouraged to store libexecdir files in a package-specific subdi
    2 KB (277 words) - 15:19, 29 June 2011
  • == FESCo should allow non packagers to be committee members ==
    2 KB (268 words) - 08:05, 18 September 2016
  • == Would be good if there was an acl for "let all packagers edit this package" in pkgdb ==
    2 KB (244 words) - 21:08, 22 May 2009
  • === Packagers/Reviewers/People interested ===
    11 members (0 subcategories, 0 files) - 07:34, 19 May 2022
  • and the feedback identified many gaps, especially from the packagers’ point of view. # Improve documentation and guidelines for users and packagers, based on the feedback from the survey.
    3 KB (381 words) - 14:08, 7 February 2024
  • To assist packagers in bringing Telepathy-related packages to Fedora and assisting in their con
    720 bytes (87 words) - 05:09, 20 August 2008
  • ...upstream review system for proposed changes or send feedback to the fedora packagers for merged changes ...either to bisect the changes to detect what caused the problem or let the packagers do the investigation.
    2 KB (290 words) - 11:54, 12 May 2017
  • {{#fedoradocs:https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/epel-packagers-sig/}} = EPEL Packagers SIG =
    4 KB (683 words) - 20:40, 8 September 2021
  • packagers in EPEL were bound to support software longer than RHEL did Packagers commit to maintaining software in EPEL for at least one RHEL
    3 KB (408 words) - 17:47, 13 February 2019
  • == Packagers/Reviewers/People interested == * packagers can add extra ones for their packages
    6 KB (1,042 words) - 14:22, 20 February 2009
  • ...a collection of points that come to mind for CPAN authors, by Fedora Perl packagers.
    1 KB (201 words) - 06:13, 8 January 2009
  • Packagers: * Packagers are likely to appreciate the new automatic patch application features
    3 KB (451 words) - 10:45, 28 February 2013
  • ...ttp://rpmlint.zarb.org/cgi-bin/trac.cgi/ticket/171] exists that would help packagers find out where do they violate this proposed guideline.
    1 KB (171 words) - 07:20, 10 February 2009
  • == Packagers and Developers ==
    5 KB (460 words) - 03:15, 1 November 2013
  • ...ts above the Source: line to explain the situation to reviewers and future packagers. Example:
    711 bytes (114 words) - 09:20, 18 September 2016
  • ...temp</code> since this is guaranteed to exist on every system. From there, packagers are expected to use a sane ''BuildRoot''.
    993 bytes (157 words) - 00:48, 21 May 2009
  • Packagers: * Packagers will likely enjoy simplified spec files
    4 KB (536 words) - 19:37, 7 November 2013
View ( | ) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)