[Fedora-packaging] Conflicts in Core and Extras packages

[Michael Schwendt]

On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 12:35:26 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:

> Michael Schwendt schrieb:
> > On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 07:08:36 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> >> For those of you that are not on fedora-advisory-board find attached a
> >> discussion with Michael Schwendt on that list that IMHO falls in the
> >> area of the Packaging Committee. Could you guys please handle that? tia!
> >>
> >> If the Committee thinks some parts of this discussion is the area of the
> >> FESCo please notify me or that the PC members that are part of FESCo
> >> bring it over to FESCo. Also please try to get Michael involved into
> >> this discussion -- he seems to be interested in this so he's probably
> >> one of the best people to find a solution for the issue.
> > 
> >> But I don't think there is anything to do for FESCo *before* there are
> >> general packaging rules in the guidelines that clarify when Conflicts
> >> are allowed/acceptable and when not (for both Core and Extras). Further:
> >> Extras is no second class citizen -- if Core packages are allowed to
> >> conflict with other parts of Core then Extras packages should IMHO be
> >> allowed to Conflict with packages of Core, too. Sure, that should be
> >> controlled and I think FESCo in the future should approve each Conflict
> >> before it hits the repo.
> > If you had added these extra paragraphs to the original thread on f-a-b
> > list, I would have commented it with:
> >    "Why can't FESCO simply decide whether they want Fedora Extras
> >     to be free of package conflicts or not?"
> 
> We *should* not "simply decide" without evaluating first if there are
> valid reasons for conflicts.

No, such "evaluation" is off-topic for this list.
You're trying to complicate matters.

Perhaps based on a misunderstanding of what types of conflicts are "in the
wild". For a moment, just forget your corner-cases I've commented on
before.

> All we have until now is this discussion --
> we don't have rules or guidelines when conflicts are acceptable and when
> not.
> 
> And I don't see any reasons why those rules or guidelines need to be
> different between Core and Extras, and thus it's IMHO business for the
> packaging committee. If Spot/the Committee clearly says "No, that's not
> our area of work" then I'll consider it a task for FESCo again.
> 
> > Or rephrased:
> >    "Does FESCO want a full install of Fedora Extras and Core to be
> >     possible or not?"
> 
> Well, Core has conflicts with other core packages afaik. So the above
> will never work afaics, with or without Extras.

Is that true?
 

The stuff I'm interested in first is "Conflicts: foo" which actually
prevent multiple packages to be installed at once. Such conflicts do exist
in Fedora Extras and asks for steering. 

A simple decision without any need to argue about it.