Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: AllegroOgg - Ogg library for use with the Allegro game library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188625 bugzilla@xxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- QAContact|fedora-extras- |fedora-package- |list@xxxxxxxxxx |review@xxxxxxxxxx wart@xxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |wart@xxxxxxxxxx ------- Additional Comments From wart@xxxxxxxxxx 2006-04-18 10:07 EST ------- The real conflict with these two libraries is that they both create libraries with the basename of 'alogg'. If you're worried about conflicts, then renaming the spec file isn't enough. The packaging guidelines don't give an unambiguous answer about the name, however: "When naming a package, the name should match the upstream tarball or project name from which this software came." In this case, the upstream tarball and project name don't match. As a fallback: "If this package has been packaged by other distributions/packagers in the past, then you should try to match their name for consistency." In this case, I wasn't able to find any other distributions that package this particular library. I did find the other 'alogg' in Debian, however. I would interpret the guidelines to mean that this other alogg should get priority for the 'alogg' name, and Hans' choice to use AllegroOgg to match the upstream package name is entirely appropriate. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.