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

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Compat packages



On 03/19/2009 08:44 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> Is there any policy at all on compat packages?  I can't find anything
> except this oblique reference to "openssl" vs "openssl096b":
> 
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Multiple_packages_with_the_same_base_name
> 
> There are a number of compat-* packages in Fedora.
> 
> We would like to add one for celt (an audio codec), since the
> bitstream changes incompatibly in each release, and interoperability
> depends on an application always using the same specific version.
> 
> (This is in relation to this bug:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485245
> and the celt package in both Rawhide and RHEL 5)

There is no formalized policy at this time. The last attempt by FESCo
was tabled, but is here:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BrianPepple/DraftCompatPackages

My opinion is that compat- packages are acceptable in cases where the
primary (non-compat) maintainer agrees that there is value in the compat
packages, and that it does not encourage upstreams to remain on old APIs
unnecessarily.

~spot


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