[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Naming Policy (first draft)



On Wed, 2005-02-23 at 14:18 -0600, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote:
> Working as fast as I can... here is the first draft of the Naming Policy
> for Fedora Extras. Its not 100% complete yet, there are at least two
> sections missing, but it covers the bases for most new packagers.
> 
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines
> 
> Feedback is welcome, and encouraged.

First of all a big thank you for doing this, a packaging standard for
Extras (and for Core as well I hope!) is certainly most welcome and
<cough> somewhat overdue :) 

Some comments after a quick read-through:

1) Version and release-tags: Package version should obviously follow
upstream version in normal, sane cases but especially things like 1.0-
pre1 need special rules to handle without epochs, those should be
covered in this doc. The old fedora.us packaging guidelines doc, section
C-3 (http://www.fedora.us/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines) pretty much
covers these cases if you drop the 0.fdr tags from the rules.

2) While at versions and releases: can we *please* have a standard on
release-tags. Current FC trees have a wild variety of things in there
like "3jpp_2fc", in general a truly random FC3 vs fc2 dist-tags for some
packages (disttags are just fine when needed but can we standardize on
lowercase like with package names, please :) .. and so on. Just do
'rpm -qp --qf "%{release}\n" *|sort -u' on current FC-devel RPMS
directory for giggles. Please let's have a standard of allowed
characters in release and version tags as well since we're having one
for names?

3) Addon packages: when a package is renamed, eg 'adodb' -> 'php-adodb'
it *might* be a good idea to add the original name as a "Provides:
adodb" so people looking for upstream naming can find it more easily.

Oh and FWIW current rawhide contains quite a few packages other than
pam_ and SDL_ with underscores in the name (see below). Of these the
various apache mod_foo packages are numerous enough to warrant an
exception rule of their own, others should perhaps be renamed?

[pmatilai chip RPMS]$ rpm -qp --qf "%{name}\n"|grep _
arptables_jf
dhcpv6_client
java_cup
java_cup-javadoc
java_cup-manual
knm_new
libart_lgpl
libart_lgpl-devel
lm_sensors
lm_sensors-devel
microcode_ctl
mod_auth_kerb
mod_auth_mysql
mod_auth_pgsql
mod_authz_ldap
mod_dav_svn
mod_perl
mod_perl-devel
mod_python
mod_ssl
nss_db
nss_db-compat
nss_ldap
sg3_utils
tcp_wrappers
ttfonts-zh_CN
ttfonts-zh_TW

	- Panu -


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]