On 07/14/2010 09:55 PM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
It seems he has lifted code from some of these and used it rather than
using them as libs?
Do I ask them to send these to upstream? These modifications are
specific for the recoll package only it seems.
I haven't looked closely at this
Rahul Sundaram writes:
I haven't looked closely at this specific case but the general idea is
that if a project A is modifying B and not discussing those
modifications at all with B, then we end up having duplicated code
instead of having project B being enhanced by A's contributions. In
On 07/15/2010 10:06 PM, Jean-Francois Dockes wrote
Especially in the case of Binc, I find it a bit strange that Fedora rules
would appear to forbid code reuse. This goes quite a bit against common
wisdom. Not all interesting code is published as a library, or maintained,
and sometimes the only
hi,
I'd like to confirm if I can approve recoll[1] which uses some build
deps that it ships in the tar itself. Namely, unac and binc imap.
1. I see a unac directory with a stripped down version of unac. You need
to
package unac separately and add it as a build requires IMO.
Parts of
On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 11:31:01 +0530
Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com wrote:
hi,
I'd like to confirm if I can approve recoll[1] which uses some build
deps that it ships in the tar itself. Namely, unac and binc imap.
1. I see a unac directory with a stripped down version of unac.
