KISS in Guidelines/Micro-Optimizations

[Toshio Kuratomi]

Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 13.03.2008 07:25, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>> Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>>>>>>>> "VS" == Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta at iki.fi> writes:
>>> VS> And by the way, in my opinion the discussion should not be only
>>> VS> about Unicode, but about restricting package names even to a
>>> VS> subset of ASCII (let's say eg.  a-z, A-Z, 0-9, -, +, _, .).
> 
> FWIW, +1
> 
>>> This is why we need a concrete proposal to vote on.  Things would have
>>> gone much better if we had one.
>> +1
>> One of the problems I have with "ban packages with unicode names" is 
>> that it doesn't consider what to do when a package name upstream is 
>> non-ASCii. 
> 
> Well, I see your point, but on the other hand: do we need to have
> details like those you outline in the guidelines?  There is enough in
> there already and they are hard to read and understand.
> 
> Further: And does the FPC really need and want to solve details like
> this? Trying to sort those out is of course a respectable goal, but it's
> not yet a big problem afaics.
> 
Actually, my issue is I do not want us trying to solve the details.  I 
think package name is a piece of information that has to be decided at 
something broader than the distro level.  So if upstream is going to use 
a non-ASCii package name and we're going to ban it on that basis and 
that's it period, then I am not a -1 (I might vote 0 if my vote made no 
difference otherwise.)

> So maybe it really just as simple as saying "ban packages with unicode
> names". or, to be more precise, make it something like: "Package names
> are limited to 'a-z, A-Z, 0-9, -, +, _, .' If you have a package with a
> different problem come to fedora-packaging-list and discuss with us;
> once we solved it in a few packages we can write a page like 'Hints how
> to adjust package names if they contain non-ASCII characters'".
> 
I am against anything that leaves the packager with the impression that 
they should change the package name on their own in this case.  This 
needs to be done at least cross-distro, more hopefully upstream.  I'll 
reply to one of Ralf's messages with an example.

-Toshio

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20080313/28283983/attachment.sig>