On 7/3/07, Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
We didn't have quorum in the Fedora Packaging Meeting but we did discuss the proposal[1]_ to relax the guidelines for packages with multiple versions. After some discussion it was decided that restricting the maintainer too much is not desirable. Some points: * Guideline was written in the present manner to avoid confusion * Using compat-* as a namespace for all less than current libraries has the following disadvantages over [name][version]: * cvs history won't follow the compat-* even though it is arguably closer to the original package than the upgraded one. * BuildRequires would have to be changed between branches to accommodate the compat-* on the newer branch. I'd like to have votes on relaxing the guidelines as follows: ''' For many reasons, it is sometimes advantageous to keep multiple versions of a package in Fedora to be installed simultaneously. When doing so, the package name should reflect this fact. One package should use the base name with no versions and all other addons should note their version in the name. ''' This gives the maintainer the leeway to choose whether the package is best served by having the latest version carry the unadorned name forward or the previous version.
So I can see this in my head... this would be like python15 python20 python22 python23 python24 python for something like say EPEL where you might need to have python23/24/30 installed on a system for an app to work since the shipped version is 22. I would say that there would need to be a standardization of how these older items should/would be packaged up so that people do not accidently run one when the other was wanted. Or is this meaning something else? -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice" -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
