Core Packages in Violation of the Fedora Naming Guidelines

David Lutterkort dlutter at
Thu Jul 13 21:56:05 UTC 2006

On Thu, 2006-07-13 at 08:43 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> Le mercredi 12 juillet 2006 à 18:52 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi a écrit :
> > So it looks like the idea of "upgrading" from a Fedora package to
> > JPackage to Fedora that was expressed by Fernando Nasser [1]_ is an
> > anti-goal (ie: It is explicitly not the desired behaviour.)
> The migration is more jpp -> fc but even if fc -> jpp should never be
> desirable ideally the truth is fc sometimes lags behind and users would
> rather use the latest jpp package than the old fc-customized one.
> It's not a simple problem-space. 

That's why it would be very helpful if somebody who is familiar with
that problem space could write up what the packaging guideline should
be, and why it should be that way. Even better if somebody starts a page

There seem to be conflicting views on how exactly the jpp/fc thing
should play out for users, especially with respect to upgrades
interleaving (or not) jpp and fc packages.

The main reason this is needed is to enable reviews of Java packages for
FE and make sure they take advantage of the knowledge about Java
packaging that jpackage has accumulated over the years.


More information about the Fedora-maintainers mailing list