[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Java Naming Page



On 7/14/06, Enrico Scholz <enrico scholz informatik tu-chemnitz de> wrote:
toshio tiki-lounge com (Toshio Kuratomi) writes:

>   http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/JavaPackageNaming
>
> Feel free to review it and see if I've missed anything, misstated the
> effects of naming according to a certain proposal, etc.

| 1. Allow for upgrading between the Fedora and JPackage repositories so
|    that upgrade paths similar to the following works:

This will be needed for the first installation of a Java package from FE
only. Then, I see the following two situations:

1. user enabled on FE repository
   --> jpackage versioning is uninteresting

2. user enabled both FE and JPackage repositories
   --> When FE packager is a little bit behind, jpackage packages will
       override FE packags again. This would render JPackages in FE
       useless.

General versioniong rules for mixing repositories are impossible so I
suggest to ignore the jpackage Release: resp. just make sure that first
FE package wins against the original JPackage package.


|  2. Allow packagers to tell what JPackage release the java package was
|     based against.

I do not think that this must be expressed with Release:; you could
document this somewhere else (%description) or write

| Provides: jpackage(%name) = %jpackage_version-%jpackage_release


Would it be better to look at the java packages being a seperate repo
with its own naming standards? Anaconda could aim at these packages in
their own on disk repo and a fuller jpackage repo could be included on
the download sites.


--
Stephen J Smoogen.
CSIRT/Linux System Administrator


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]