[Fedora-packaging] [Vote] Multiple version naming overly restrictive

Ralf Corsepius rc040203 at freenet.de
Thu Jul 5 16:55:10 UTC 2007

On Thu, 2007-07-05 at 11:37 -0500, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-07-05 at 09:25 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > Ralf's change makes sense as well.  spot, if you're working on adding
> > compat-* guidelines, do you want to work this in or should I add it to
> > next week's agenda separately?  (There's a review pending on this change
> > so I want to keep the first part moving forward.)
> No, go ahead. I don't know when I will get to the compat guidelines.
The question to discuss would be: Under which circumstance are they
applicable and when should the <package>N approach be preferred.

I am inclined to think the <package>N approach to be more versatile and
generally applicable (esp. cases of "fully parallel installable
packages"), while the compat-* approach is aiming at providing "backward
compatible run-time packages" (in particular lib-packages).


More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list