Updates to Packaging Guidelines

[Jonathan Underwood]

On 22/05/06, Tom 'spot' Callaway <tcallawa at redhat.com> wrote:
> Per FESCO, there was one major addition to the Packaging Guidelines:
>
> The naming scheme for addon emacs compatible components is:
> emacs-common-foo, where foo is the upstream name of the component.
>

This is unclear as regarding the naming of the sub package names for
the different flavours of emacs... guidelines now seem to indicate:

emacs-common-foo for the package name and files common to all flavours.

and subpackage names like

xemacs-emacs-common-foo
emacs-emacs-common-foo

or perhaps,

emacs-common-foo-xemacs

etc etc. Seems a bit silly (!)

However, the rejected alternative would have had the package name
emacs-foo, which contains the files for GNU emacs, with subpackages
xemacs-foo and emacs-foo-common, if required (the current guideline
seems to want a rename of emacs-auctex to emacs-common-auctex, even
though the package is only built for GNU Emacs).

Eg. http://physics.open.ac.uk/~ju83/emacs-muse.spec

Honestly, I really think this guideline should be reconsidered.

Jonathan.