On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 05:19:24PM -0400, Tom spot Callaway wrote: > On Tue, 2008-03-25 at 22:13 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > > ? Can someone explain to me what is meant with JPackageNaming? > > All of the packages which originated from the JPackage repository had a > "repotag" of jpp on them. When they were merged into Fedora Core > (pre-Core/Extras merge), they kept their jpp repotag. When the merger > happened, we tried to get rid of the repotag, because it was a violation > of the NamingGuidelines, but we got a huge amount of pushback on this. > > Finally, simply to get past the issue, we drafted a temporary > compromise, letting the repotag remain until it was no longer useful. > The intent was to provide some time for the Java packagers to work out > alternate methods to perform the tasks that they were reliant upon the > repotag for... but no such work ever took place. > > In fact, upon retrospection, I'm not entirely sure what value the > repotag holds, which is why it either needs to be thoroughly > rationalized, or gotten rid of entirely. The idea was to treat jpackage as an upstream vendor such that Fedora imports jpackage rpms, does some modifications on them, but still the next jpackage release would win over the "local" Fedora modifications. The same argument that undoes jpackage's guidelines as canonical over Fedora's applied here would mean that this setup is no longer wanted anymore. W/o being involved in jpackage I kinda liked their cross-distribution type of work. Perhaps the Fedora java guidelines could flow back into jpackage's. After all there are many jpackage folks around here. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpvx8SeTbu8z.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
