Re: About versions and macros

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

 



* Petr Šabata [03/03/2016 14:44] :
>
> I'm not sure it would be possible to do it the way you suggest, supporting
> both versioning schemes at the same time.  The conversion could be largely
> automated and all packages could be altered & rebuilt during the next
> Perl mass rebuild, for example.  With new generators in place.

It sounds simpler to have a switch-day where all packages move to the new
scheme and makes sense to do this in a side build-root (during a Perl mass
rebuild or not).

> > I think having a versioning scheme that works the same way as rpm's
> > versioning is a good thing and would avoid plenty of hacks and the need for
> > some epoch bumps.
> 
> +1

Huge +1

> On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 04:17:45PM +0000, Paul Howarth wrote:
>
> > As for replacing much of the existing boilerplate with macros, I'm
> > personally less keen on that because I think it actually makes specs harder
> > to read, at least until I know what each of those macros actually does under
> > the hood.

A related point is a higher barrier of entry for new members of the SIG.
Requiring people to learn specific macros before they can submit packages
or contribute to existing spec files is a huge hassle.

Emmanuel
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
perl-devel mailing list
perl-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/perl-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Legacy Announce]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Devel]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite Information]
  Powered by Linux