Summary of the 2008-03-11 Packaging Committee meeting

[Ralf Corsepius]

On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 19:59 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> Le jeudi 13 mars 2008 à 19:29 +0100, Ralf Corsepius a écrit :
> > On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 19:22 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > > Le jeudi 13 mars 2008 à 19:08 +0100, Ralf Corsepius a écrit :
> > > > On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 18:47 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > > > > Le jeudi 13 mars 2008 à 17:47 +0100, Ralf Corsepius a écrit :
> > > > > > On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 09:41 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > > > > > > Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 01:25 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > > > > > > >> 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.
> > > > > > > > Transliterate/translate them to ASCII.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This is a proposal I am strongly -1 to.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > IMO, you are making fuzz about nothing. For most languages such native
> > > > > > transliterations exist.
> > > > > 
> > > > > IMHO you are woefully unaware of the fuzziness of a transliteration
> > > > > process.
> > > > Manual transliteration?
> > > 
> > > There's no such thing as a standard automated transliteration,
> > That's why I am talking about manual transliteration - I do not want to
> > automated transliteration nor automated translation.  
> > 
> > That's why I am talking about using
> > ...
> > Name: ecollier-fonts
> 
> This one people do care about, that's the project name not a technical
> string.
Wrong - This is the technical string, a package is identified by.

Fedora has the liberty and need to impose restrictions on it.

That said, renaming écollier-fonts to ecollier-fonts is not any
different from requiring certain prefixes on certain packages (perl-xxx)
or other arbitrary renaming conventions (xxx-devel) or disallow blanks
and special characters ($<>[]()\n\r\b\t) from package names.


> > Source0: écollier-fonts
> 
> This one no one care about, its a technical name
Wrong again: This is a file on a remote server, whose name is out of
Fedora's control.

> > and (optionally) to add
> > Provides: écollier-fonts = %version-%release
> 
> This is a technical alias.
Yes.

>  It would be fine as technical workaround,
> it's not a substitute to the primary name a project feels an affect to.
Nope: It's a string provided as legacy to tools which can use it. It's
only visible inside of rpm and to tools applying metadata.

> In other words you reversed priorities to fit your needs, but the
> reversing is not innocuous, and you will offend people.
> 
> At one time Suse felt it smart to use 8:3 package filenames to cater to
> DOS mirrors.
Their decision was right at the time they did so.

>  You seem to follow the same logic.
I can't deny the feeling you haven't understood anything I said :/