[Mailman-Users] Red Hat FHS packaging

Andy Heath cycling at axelrod.plus.com
Tue Jun 14 22:38:58 CEST 2005

Mark Sapiro wrote:

> Andy Heath wrote:
>>If the mailman developer community adopts the FHS for
>>mailman then that's a different story entirely and
>>I would follow without complaint.
> In fairness to John Dennis, he did raise these issues for discussion
> last year on the Mailman-Developers list. See threads at
> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-developers/2004-September/017270.html
> and
> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-developers/2004-October/017343.html

Thanks for pointing me at these posts Mark.

I read all the content of those 2 posts by
John and understand the arguments.

I'm still of the view that unless the community
runs with it then its not such a good step though
I appreciate John's view is different.

The issue it raises is maintenance.  If FC does
it differently then it means users are
dependent on FC providing updated packages
or working hard to manually do that mapping
with updated code.
Effectively it becomes an FC package not
a general one but the developers are not
part of FC.  It also introduces another
step at which bugs can occur.

Is there guidance in the standard mailman distributions
on how to build for FC starting with a tar.gz ?

There needs to be some easy path between the two methods
in my view.


More information about the Mailman-Users mailing list