[Fedora-packaging] Drafts for next Tuesday

[Toshio Kuratomi]

Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> This goes out specifically to the Fedora Packaging Committee Members,
> but is certainly open for comments from all.
> 
> We've got a lot of drafts that are queued up for next Tuesday's meeting,
> so it would be very helpful if you read them all well in advance:
> 
> As always, this list is pulled from
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/GuidelinesTodo (which embeds the
> table from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/DraftsTodo ):
> 
> ASCII Naming Guidelines (spot) :
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/ASCIINaming

Were you going to add something about working with other distros if 
transliteration is not done upstream?  (Jesse's post:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2008-March/msg00169.html
)

> Perl Guidelines (spot) :
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Perl
Looks sane

> Eclipse Plugin Guidelines (spot) :
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/EclipsePlugins

Do we want the Group tag information?  I know we've decided group is 
irrelevant in the main guidelines.

In the Jar Expansion (rare) item:
- I'd remove (rare) from the title.
- Should we remove the debug_package %{nil} workaround since there's 
another workaround listed and we want debug packages?


> OpenOffice.org extensions guidelines (Caolan McNamara) :
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/OpenOffice.orgExtensions

For item #3, does it matter which of the three directory names is used? 
  Should we pick one?

I'd split item #5 into two as the first sentence deals with package 
naming and the second with directory locations.

#5b -- In the second part of 5, I'd list both the arch directory and 
arch-independent directory and I'd list them with macros: 
{_datadir}/package-name & %{_libdir}/package-name

#5b -- Should we have plugins install into subdirectories owned by 
openoffice.org-core?  ie: %{_libdir}openoffice.org and 
%{_datadir}/openoffice.org.  Note that %{_datadir}/openoffice.org 
doesn't currently exist, so it's a new directory that 
openoffice.org-core would need to provide.

Structure: I'd reorder the items so they match the order in which one 
encounters them in the spec file:
   5a 6 4 2 3 7 5b 3 1

Having short titles instead of just numbers might also be good.

> Secure BuildRoot (Lubomir Kundrak) :
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/SecureBuildRoot

Panu, can buildroot go into rpmbuild?

> Register VirtualProvides (Patrice Dumas) :
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/ProvidesList

I'd rather the page listed what should be added as the primary point of 
reference.  That will also justify its existence.  For instance, if the 
purpose is collaboration between packages, why list internal provides?

What makes the example of kuipc/cernlib(devel) internal?  It is for one 
package to require another so I don't understand the distinction.

> SysV-style Initscript Guidelines (spot) :
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/SysVInitScript
> 
rh_status in example superfluous?

lsb header-- how actually works would be better in a noteclass (but that 
might not support formatting)

lsb header example first instead of summary?

Trim this from ScripletSnippets? 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#head-1fc158879abd9cc7dd2ef2231983216928c7e35c

> I don't have the Java Guidelines draft on the list yet, but I hope that
> it will be ready by next Tuesday:
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Java
> 
I still see open questions here.

-Toshio

-------------- 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/20080325/f82f2e0d/attachment.sig>