[Bug 507083] Review Request: poco - C++ class libraries for network-centric applications

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=507083





--- Comment #21 from Michal Schmidt <mschmidt at redhat.com>  2009-11-12 10:29:25 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #20)
> Unusual, but not without benefits. "poco" is a metapackage that helps the
> developer to install the whole toolkit at once, including headers
> ("poco-devel") and documentation ("poco-doc").

I believe that developers are used to installing a *-devel package and a *-doc
package when they need them and therefore such a convenience package is of
limited usefulness. So I'd drop the "poco" package completely and have the spec
file produce only subpackages. The %description paragraph would have to be
copied to every subpackage. And the MANIFEST file should not be packaged at
all, it's of no use.

On the other hand, such a convenience package does not break any guidelines, so
if you really like to have it, I won't push for the change.

> If this layout is not welcome,
> it may be reorganized: instead of "poco", "poco-devel" package becomes a new
> toplevel, not depending on "poco-doc". The name of the spec file will have to
> be "poco-devel.spec" in this case.

Please no. That would be ugly.

> The boost toplevel package depends only on binary subpackages which has little
> meaning to either developers or users.  

Agreed.


Please take a look at "rpm -q --changelog poco". You'll see macros got expanded
there. Use %% to prevent macro expansion in the changelog. Or just avoid the %
character completely.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.