[Bug 188542] Review Request: hylafax

Wed Dec 6 00:23:42 UTC 2006

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: hylafax

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188542

------- Additional Comments From faxguy at howardsilvan.com  2006-12-05 19:23 EST -------
Christoph,

I understand the confusion on this review.  I am truly sorry for it, and I wish
that I could have somehow known ahead of time how to prevent the confusion...
because I certainly would have.

The mismatches between packages and specs and such has to do with the
development pace and my focus on software development rather than RPM packaging,
so I guess it's a chicken-and-egg kind of problem.

I've uploaded the hylafax-5.0.0-1.i386.rpm file that I was using to here:

http://superb-east.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/hylafax/hylafax-5.0.0-1test.i386.rpm

Yes, I know the filename is different - that could not be avoided.  But the file
data is the same.

As far as package/repository naming goes... I understand the httpd naming
manner, and I completely understand why it is named that way.  Certainly it may
not meet the Extras criteria naming rules - neverless, it still makes sense to
me and is not confusing, and in fact I probably would have followed the same
naming convention in their shoes.  I do not see it as an exception to
common-sense - although, yes, it may be an exception according to Extras naming
rules.  Certainly the Extras rules can be a subset of common-sense.

For other examples - not of package naming, specifically - but for naming in
general... postfix and sendmail both have "sendmail" executables (among other
competing executable names).  Similarly, mgetty-sendfax has a "sendfax"
executable that competes with an identically named executable from HylaFAX
(which is why HylaFAX isn't in Core in the first place, as the RedHat 5.2/6.0
maintainers decided to favor mgetty-sendfax and do away with HylaFAX rather than
implement a "switching" mechanism as they have done for sendmail/postfix).  All
of this makes sense to me - and indeed I can see why it would confuse some - but
if one understands that, realistically, the purpose in the naming conflicts is a
perfect manner of clue-sticking the user that they're looking at conflicting
packages, just the same as if they were looking at two packages from the same
repository but of different versions.

The HylaFAX+ repository is aptly named "hylafax" because it is, after all,
HylaFAX.  HylaFAX+ version numbers have always been different from the version
numbers at HylaFAX.org.  Certainly it is not the only HylaFAX repository, but
realize that the hylafax.org repository is, itself, a fork - there almost always
have been different repositories (even among the earliest contributors).  To say
that HylaFAX+ is not HylaFAX is to say that when Alan Cox patches the Linux
kernel for RedHat that it no longer is Linux.

The sourceforge HylaFAX project is known as HylaFAX+ for those people that have
a tough time understanding the issues that I am discussing, and certainly it
makes it easier than always saying "Sourceforge HylaFAX project".  That said,
you really won't find anyone out there desireous to run both HylaFAX+ and
HylaFAX.org for practical reasons.

Realize that Darren's (Paul's) purpose here isn't really to assist the users who
will be using HylaFAX (in that they may become upset to find themselves using
HylaFAX+ instead of HylaFAX.org software).  Rather, his purpose here is to take
measures to prevent users from seeing, as I do, that HylaFAX+ is as much HylaFAX
as the software found at HylaFAX.org or SGI-HylaFAX or his own commercial
"HylaFAX Enterprise Edition".  If he really, truly, believed what he is trying
to say here then he wouldn't have named his own product with "HylaFAX".

My suggestion, Christoph, would be to see the HylaFAX+ vs. HylaFAX.org thing for
what it is, the usual forking arguments, and move past it so that we can get
this into Extras ... whether the ultimate package name be "hylafax" or "hylafax+".

-- 
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.