On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Vít Ondruch <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dne 4.4.2013 15:47, Miloslav Trmač napsal(a):
Ok, so shall I read it an "go ahead, and propose Fedora policy change, that although package name includes version, the .spec file should be named without the version."?On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 3:16 PM, Vít Ondruch <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Since .spec file is named the same as package, then you cannot merge straight forward the changes from one package into another.
That is again a Fedora policy, not a RPM requirement.
(I can't speak for the FPC.) If it would actually save you work (within the context of other existing policies that discourage multiple versions), sure, it's at least worth discussing. If you don't need it as such, and would only need it with widespread support for parallel installation, I can't see the benefit right now.
I feel that we do so and we are not able to maintain it properly. So there would not be any change in this regard.As you probably already know, there is fairly strong resistance against Fedora shipping many versions because some of as feel that we wouldn't be able to maintain them properly.
Yes, I have the same worry. However my conclusion from this is that we shouldn't make a bad situation worse - in particular, it might be good if it were easier to become a Fedora "packager" by helping comaintain a critical package than by packaging an obscure package that nobody wants to use.
That's both, RPM and Fedora plolicies and don't forget about YUM. They are not independent.
If you need Fedora policy to support multiple versions, and don't care about RPM, please say so.
If you need RPM to support multiple versions, and don't care about Fedora policy, please say so (and suggest practical semantics for (yum update)).
If you need unmodified upstream deployment systems and unmodified upstream packages with minimal Fedora/RPM interference/involvement, please say so.
You've argued for RPM support, but it seems that the difficulties you actually encounter are related to Fedora policies, and I wanted to make that clear.
You've been offered a technical alternative to your desired RPM changes, and AFAICS it fulfills all your requirements except for what I consider esthetics.
Mirek
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
