On Wed, 6 Nov 2019 at 06:02, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <dominik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Monday, 04 November 2019 at 23:38, Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 5:26 PM Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > So I started to review > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1767883 which is a package > > > which is normally in the zlib package but has been commented out from > > > shipping on RHEL-8. It is needed for chromium and other items so Tom > > > Callaway has made up a package for it. However the naming guidelines > > > for packages have deprecated -compat packages even though this seems > > > to have been added after that rule was put in place. > > > > > > In reviewing the package the name was the only thing which came up and > > > i would like to give it a pass versus having it renamed to minizip1.2 > > > (or better yet libminizip since all it is a library) untl the upstream > > > zlib package is named that way also. > > > > > > > Honestly, it should probably be fixed in Fedora to be minizip1 / > > minizip1-devel instead of minizip-compat / minizip-compat-devel... > > > > But I guess that as long as it's not that in Fedora, it's fine to be > > not it in EPEL... > > I'd use the correct name and add Provides with what's in Fedora to > be removed when Fedora package is renamed. I don't see a good reason > not to do it properly when you have a chance. Dropping Provides: is > easier than package renaming. > > Thanks. Tom went with minizip1.2 and made some other changes and I have hit the + button. -- Stephen J Smoogen. _______________________________________________ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
