Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476471 --- Comment #52 from Michael Hideo <mhideo@xxxxxxxxxx> 2009-03-12 06:44:32 EDT --- (In reply to comment #51) > > Attached is a screenshot of a practical use case where we are using installing > > different versions of the fedora security guide on the same distro. By having > > separate Fedora versioned packages, system administrators can read and perform > > specific fedora release procedures. This saves them from having to install the > > Security Guide package on 3 different instances of Fedora. Does this make > > sense? > > Parallel install (ie having multiple versions installed) is really another > issue. > I can see publican's way makes sense on RHEL but I am not sure on Fedora where > we have > a new release every 6 months or so. How many fedora-security-guide's do we > want > to have in a fedora release? As many fedora platforms as the system administrators are administering. Or maybe you are thinking about subpackaging. > The base package name does not have to determine the name of the package that > is > installed. I don't think we support installing multiple versions of the > fedora release-notes either say. If I could provide a metric that shows that people reading the fedora 10 release notes online are not running fedora 10, would you be supportive of this request? > > I am not recommending this, but fedora-security-guide could provide > a fedora-security-guide-11 package for F11, etc, allowing parallel install. > As I see it though there should only be one base package in Fedora and it > should > be named "fedora-security-guide" (going by the current submission). > How fedora-security-guide.spec gets created is not really Fedora's problem. > Publican spec files are not that hard to write and could easily be scripted, > if publican can't do the Right Thing for Fedora packaging. > > I see parallel installation as a corner-case and not something Fedora needs > go out of its way to support: IMHO most users would only want the latest > version > of the guide installed - are the changes in security between Fedora releases > really that big? > > But if the Fedora Packaging Committee can be persuaded that we need an > exception > for Publican or approves packaging guidelines for publican packages that would > be fine. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review