rawhide report: 20080211 changes

[Michael Schwendt]

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 08:44:54 -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote:

> On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 13:27 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams <ivazqueznet <at> gmail.com> writes:
> > > So then don't make it a compat-* package.
> > > 
> > > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-February/msg01009.html
> > 
> > This distinction you and Michael Schwendt are making between compat packages 
> > with or without the "compat-" prefix doesn't appear to be shared by all 
> > maintainers. I see the following packages in Rawhide matching compat-*-devel:
> > compat-guichan05-devel-0.5.0-8.fc9.i386.rpm
> > compat-guile-16-devel-1.6.7-7.fc8.i386.rpm
> > compat-libosip2-devel-2.2.2-15.fc8.i386.rpm
> > compat-wxGTK26-devel-2.6.4-2.i386.rpm
> 
> An oversight that will hopefully be corrected.

Not worth the hassle, IMO. It would also affect 3rd party packages.
And I would not like to see more superfluous rebuilds and updates in
all branches as a result of renaming a package. Doing the rename only
in rawhide would not be trouble-free either. Among some packagers it
has become way to popular to copy even the smalles changes in rawhide
to all branches. Renaming BuildRequires would be such a change, and
adding Obsoletes/Provides for the compat- namespace would not change
the situation at all.

In Fedora Extras CVS I would have simply renamed the packages in
rawhide and notified the maintainers of dependencies that I would
adjust the BR from compat-wxGTK26-devel to wxGTK26-devel. With ACLs
and %{?dist}-madness I don't feel good about it. It has complicated
some things a lot.