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: horde - php application framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189195 ------- Additional Comments From fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2006-12-22 01:36 EST ------- imp-h3 makes no sense for a distro-level package, other than blindly naming it the same as upstream's tarball. 'h3' is merely to designate this branch of imp development is designed to run on horde 3.x instead of 2.x so users don't mess up their dependencies. Since we are distro packagers in this case, we have built-in mechanisms to ensure version dependencies, and don't need to use the package name to further 'enforce' this idea. For now (fedora rawhide) I'll make no mention of imp-h3... we can cross the Obsoletes: bridge if/when imp branches for EPEL. I just opened bug 220577 review for imp, further discussions about imp can take place over there. I started with centos's RPM and heavily updated it to reflect the progress we've made in here so far. Jason, one last imp-related question that does pertain to this package. How far are we interested in isolating these various applications from horde (wrt file paths and URL paths)? By default horde applications plant themselves beneath the horde/ directory, which is also reflected in the URL. Imp, for instance, is found at http://site.com/horde/imp/. My imp RPM reflects this by putting config files in /etc/horde/imp and web files in /usr/share/horde/imp/. How all this pertains to this package is the registry.php file needs to know these relative relationships for everything to work. If we'd like to move these applications to /etc/imp and /usr/share/imp, we need to reflect that in registry.php before this gets approved to avoid having to parse-and-edit with each application later. -- 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. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review