Core Packages in Violation of the Fedora Naming Guidelines
nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net
Wed Jul 12 20:21:32 UTC 2006
Le mercredi 12 juillet 2006 à 14:47 -0500, Tom 'spot' Callaway a écrit :
> On Wed, 2006-07-12 at 15:18 -0400, Fernando Nasser wrote:
> > Jesse Keating wrote:
> > All Java releases for RHEL have been done this way, by adding _NNrh to
> > whatever the upstream JPackage EVR was with success.
> > For Fedora 3 and Fedora package a _NNfc was adopted. Gary Benson used
> > to have a document describing it, which I thought lived in Fedora pages
> > somewhere.
> > There are hundreds of Java packages there, all rebuilt from upstream
> > JPackage.org, shipped on Fedora for a couple of years with this EVR
> > convention.
> Perhaps its time to revisit this. Yes, it will be painful, but the way
> that these packages are named is painful.
So you're arguing to break technical features just because you find the
current naming ugly ?
How about working on a less-ugly naming with the same characteristics
> > W.r.t. the suffix added after the upstream EVR it does not really
> > matter.
> If this is indeed the case, lets drop it altogether. Adding this suffix
> (and the jpp naming) is merely going to cause rpm confusion down the
I think it's been used long enough on a packageset big enough to show
this is not the case
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e
More information about the Fedora-maintainers