[Fedora-packaging] Naming Policy (first draft)

[Dag Wieers]

On Thu, 24 Feb 2005, Panu Matilainen wrote:

> On Wed, 2005-02-23 at 23:09 +0100, Dag Wieers wrote:
> > On Wed, 23 Feb 2005, 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.
> > 
> > Looks good, I would propose a standard SPEC file (in the SRPM) formatted 
> > as:
> > 
> > 	%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-%{repotag}.spec
> > 
> > If your working on a SPEC file and install several other versions, this 
> > would prevent SPEC files replacing others. And the origin is clear too.
> 
> Eek, please lets don't. That's what CVS and distro brances of packages
> are for.

How does that affect SPEC files in SRPMs ? Afaik FE (and RH) SRPMs have a 
%{name}.spec files inside the SRPM which are not distinguishable. Even 
when FE or RH is using CVS and distro branches.

I'm talking about renaming the SPEC file to something more identifiable as 
%{name}.spec before creating the SRPM. Nothing else. DAR is doing this as 
part of the pre-processing stage of the SPEC file.

Kind regards,
--   dag wieers,  dag at wieers.com,  http://dag.wieers.com/   --
[all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power]