On Wed, 2005-02-23 at 23:09 +0100, Dag Wieers wrote: > On Wed, 23 Feb 2005, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > > > Working as fast as I can... here is the first draft of the Naming Policy > > for Fedora Extras. Its not 100% complete yet, there are at least two > > sections missing, but it covers the bases for most new packagers. > > > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines > > > > Feedback is welcome, and encouraged. > > Looks good, I would propose a standard SPEC file (in the SRPM) formatted > as: > > %{name}-%{version}-%{release}-%{repotag}.spec > > If your working on a SPEC file and install several other versions, this > would prevent SPEC files replacing others. And the origin is clear too. Eek, please lets don't. That's what CVS and distro brances of packages are for. > For the package release, it may be useful to use < 1 release numbers to > indicate a work in progress. (0.1, 0.2) We're doing the same in case we > consider something a beta or rc product. (Especially if you're posting > incremental test releases for other people to try). Yep - this should be covered in the old fedora.us naming standard doc I mentioned but certainly should be explained in the standard. - Panu -
