https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1911565 --- Comment #4 from Derek Pressnall <derekp7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- A couple more packaging questions to bring the package more in alignment with the packaging guidelines. 1) The package consists of a front-end (client) shell script (snebu-client), a client-side encryption filter (tarcrypt), and a backend (server side) binary (snebu). Should the client side components be broken out into a sub package snebu-client, and server side as snebu-server? On a single host installation, they would both be installed. Server side should have both (push-based backup can work without snebu-client on the server, but pull-based backups require it). But a client that pushes backups to a server only needs the snebu-client package (containing snebu-client shell script and tarcrypt). So I was thinking that the -server package should depend on the -client package, but since it can be used in some modes of operations without it, then maybe it makes sense for both to be installable independently of each other. 2) The client script can call user-supplied plugin scripts that do things like put a database server in hot backup mode, or invoke and mount an LVM snapshot. A template script for DB backups is provided in a man5 page describing how to create a plugin. This template doesn't get executed directly on its own, but needs to be finished off based on a user's requirements. So should a copy of template scripts like this go in the doc directory? The upstream project will eventually provide plugin parametrized scripts for various situations (PostgrSQL and Oracle DB backups, LVM snapshots, etc). At that point these will probably belong in libexec (since they are called by the app, not invoked directly). 3) The documentation is provided in manpages, and more detailed docs is in an Asciidoc format file. This is mostly the contents of the project web page (minus download and installation instructions). Is this content big enough to be placed in a separate -doc subpackage? It will eventually grow a bit bigger, by about 20% - 50%. Also should a pre-rendered HTML version of the .adoc file be included? This would of course add "asciidoctor" to the build requirements. 4) As revisions are made to the package during the review process, does the -release tag get bumped up also (along with associated entries in the changelog), or is the -release tag only frozen once / if the package is accepted? Thanks. -- 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
