[Pulp-list] Package pulp is obsoleted by pulp-server error

[Jay Dobies]

On 07/16/2012 09:46 AM, Lukas Zapletal wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 09:08:22AM -0400, Jay Dobies wrote:
>> I'd rather not. It'll require us to make the spec entry but more
>> importantly is confusing as we try to migrate people towards the v2
>> way of thinking about things. Even if I did add it, it would refer
>> to the platform itself which is still not really what you want, you
>> want the RPM support on top of that.
>>
>> I'm not sure how much it gets you either. You'll have to change APIs
>> to use v2 so you'll have to hack up code as it is. I would guess
>> (but I could be wrong on this) that changing the spec at the same
>> time will be one of the easier changes you'll need to make.
>
> Well, my intention is based on this document
>
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Renaming.2FReplacing_Existing_Packages
>
> I would expect you want the new package to be transparent to end users.
> And since this breaks also our nightly builds, it would be great adding
> it for us. We are those users as well :-) We are not there (Pulp V2 API)
> yet, but I still wan't the installer to be working.
>
> I am not sure upgrade of Katello will be even possible without this (I
> mean CFSE v1.0 -> CFSE vNEXT). I just can't tell you what is the reason
> for having this in Fedora Packaging Guidelines, I admit.
>
>>> Provides: oldpackagename = $provEVR
>>> Obsoletes: oldpackagename < $obsEVR
>

I'll get someone to look into the provides clause. We know we need to 
have an upgrade path for CFSE but it's not being worked on currently.

-- 
Jay Dobies
Freenode: jdob @ #pulp
http://pulpproject.org | http://blog.pulpproject.org