https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1490053 --- Comment #5 from Antonio Trande <anto.trande@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Alexander Ploumistos from comment #4) > (In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #3) > > What is confused to me are the Provides/Obsoletes lines > > > > Provides: liborigin = 20080225-18 > > Provides: liborigin2 = 2.0.0-12 > > Obsoletes: liborigin < 20080225-18 > > Obsoletes: liborigin2 < 2.0.0-12 > > > > In this way, you are replacing liborigin and liborigin2 de facto, so an user > > cannot install liborigin/liborigin2 and SciDAVis/liborigin3 in the same time. > > But that is the point. The older library, liborigin can import OPJ files > created with Origin v3.something to v4.something, while liborigin2 works > with versions 4.1 to 8.5.1. That is the reason why in most distributions, > including Fedora, instead of updating liborigin to v2.0.0, the older library > was kept around based on the last v1.x snapshot and a liborigin2 package was > introduced. > > The newer version -let's call it liborigin3 for the time being- can import > OPJ files from Origin version 3.5 all the way to current ones (9.4.1 and > newer), so its functionality includes and exceeds that of the two others, > plus a number of bugs in the older code have been fixed. It also has fewer > dependencies. Okay, understand. > > Why would anyone want to have all three of them installed at the same time? Why not? :) liborigin has its own functionalities; liborigin2 has its own functionalities too; liborigin3 has both liborigin and liborigin2 functionalities, and obsoletes both older Origin libraries but it's not officially released so nor officially maintained yet. > > > In my opinion, providing unofficial 'liborigin3' as private SciDAVis library > > it's better, as long as it is officially released. > > I wouldn't mind doing that, but I find it a bit confusing moving forward > from there. > > * In the spec file, would it be > Provides: bundled(liborigin) = 3.0.0.pre > or > Provides: bundled(liborigin3) = 3.0.0.pre > ? Provides: bundled(liborigin3) = 3.0.0.pre > > * Do I keep both liborigin and liborigin2 around until the official release > of v3.0.0? It seems unlikely that a package depending on either of them will > pop up in the meantime. Yes, as long as liborigin3 is released; when this happens liborigin/liborigin2 can be definitively retired. > > * Would there be any problems if instead of introducing a third version of > the library, I update liborigin to v3.0.0? That would render this review > request moot… As you written in the SPEC file, "There hasn't been a 3.0.0 release yet, nor have the changes made in scidavis's liborigin been backported." What i understand here is "liborigin inside SciDAVis is modified just for SciDAVis and not yet released from liborigin upstream". 'liborigin3' does not exist yet, so why update liborigin? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
