[Fedora-packaging] are subpackages required for optional loadable libraries?

Toshio Kuratomi a.badger at gmail.com
Wed Feb 27 18:23:08 UTC 2008

Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>>>>>> "TK" == Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger at gmail.com> writes:
> TK> I think we need guidance here as well.  For instance, if a web
> TK> application needs a database to work out of the box but that
> TK> database could be any of mysql, postgres, or sqlite, do we require
> TK> that one of those be installed?
> Actually, no.  Don't forget that the first two of those don't need to
> actually be on the machine running the application.
> Client libraries are another issue, but they should end up being much
> smaller.  And these days we should be thinking of sqlite as a default
> system component.
True.  So, would the general best practice be:
1) should work out of the box.
2) When several alternative but non-optional components exist for that, 
the packager should pick one to depend on.
   2a) The packager's decision of default can use many criteria for 
preference including whether the dependency is a system component 
(something that would be installed on most systems anyway), size, or 
promoted by upstream when making this decision.  Just be sure to put 
some thought into it.

The bugzilla package is an example of this.  As is python-SQLAlchemy.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/attachments/20080227/d0826beb/attachment.sig>

More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list