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

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Compat packages



On 03/23/2009 04:37 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
My opinion also. On that topic, should we do something about compat packages not explicitly named as such. For example, we ship gtksourceview and gtksourceview2. Shouldn't they be called 'compat-gtksourceview' and 'gtksourceview' respectively ?


No. These are 2 different historic ways to having been applied to introduce "compat packages".

1) Add "compat-*" packages

2) Use versioned package names "package<N>"

Both approaches have pros and cons each.

E.g.
* compat-* package typically supply "backward compatible run-times". They very often aim at "keeping users' applications" happy.

* "package<N>" package often aim at "parallel installation", often stemming from times when some underlying package has undergone major API/ABI changes, while it's clients/users have not been updated to the new version yet (classic example: gtk (gtk1) vs. gtk2).

To be honest, I fail to see the difference between both your cases above. Compat packages are also meant to be parallel installable (e.g. compat-gcc34), and "package<N>" also supply backward compatible run-times (as gtksourceview, used for example by dead-upstream 'scratchpad')


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