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: emacs-muse https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181404 ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-04-24 12:14 EST ------- Hi Warren - I agree, there's no real problem, technically - in fact, that's what I've done. I'm just worried from the user perspective. Perhaps I am worrying too much though, given that the user would have to install muse and emacs-muse (and/or xemacs-muse) and so should know to look for a module called muse and not emacs-muse. I would like to add though, that I think the approach used here (muse, emacs-muse, xemacs-muse from a muse srcrpm) is much more preferable to having muse muse-emacs and muse-xemacs which is what the mew model would give. Prepending the interpreter is following the current guidelines. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list [email protected] http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
