Hi! Reply out-of-order Am Montag, den 08.05.2006, 22:09 -0400 schrieb Mike A. Harris: > Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Houston, we've lost communication! Yes, that's why we IMHO need a real "Fedora Packaging Board" that handles such things. Otherwise we run into a situation where foo@xxxxxxxxxx and foo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx say foobar while bar@xxxxxxxxxx and bar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx say barfoo. :-/ > > BTW: Shortly before FC5 was released there was a irc-discussion > > regarding the package naming of the proprietary nvidia and fglrx > > drivers. It was on #fedora-extras (spot was involved in that discussion, > > too) -- the consensus was "use prefix xorg-x11-drv even for non-Xorg > > drivers". And that's what livna did for FC5 then. > > We should probably discuss this during the next FESCo-Meeting with spot. > > I'm rather surprised about that. I wasn't on such mailing lists, but > since I was the one who chose the naming, I'd have expected to have > at least been contacted by someone to determine what the package > naming rationale was. Yes, that would have been the best. But I don't think the end result would have been different. Here are some quotes from the IRC discussion: x> | if we would package gatos-driver or some other external drivers for X what naming scheme would we use? x> | xorg-x11-drv-foo? x> | But that would give users the impression that this driver is from xorg :-| x> | the repo-that-must-not-be-named is working on updated nvidia and ati packages for fc5 and is unsure how to name the packages :-| y> | x: i think xorg-x11-drv-foo is the most obvious answer y> | x: since we don't ever assume that the perl-* packages come from perl.org y> | it would be erroneous to assume that the xorg-* packages come from xorg y> | just that they are reliant upon, and add functionality to perl, or xorg x> | thx spot; the repo-that-must-not-be-named will then probably use xorg-x11-drv-nvidia and xorg-x11-drv-fglrx in the future y> | works for me. BTW, the relevant part of the package naming guidelines (that are for Core and Extras these days) starts at: http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#head-e865dfbf5ffb4156a1bdf299ace96f48af903a7a Quote: > Addon Packages (General) > If a new package is considered an "addon" package that enhances or > adds a new functionality to an existing Fedora Core or Fedora Extras > package without being useful on its own, its name should reflect this > fact. > > The new package ("child") should prepend the "parent" package in its > name, in the format: %{parent}-%{child} There is more in the wiki. Yes, I know that some people don't like this scheme. But at least one general scheme is better than a lot of different schemes. CU thl -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
