On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 12:45 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Michel Alexandre Salim <salimma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> I'm currently reviewing pgRouting: >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652533 > >> the packager is currently using "postgresql-pgrouting" as the name, which >> is alright but a bit long. There does not seem to be a policy for naming >> DB add-ons yet (though I see a couple of postgresql-* packages). > >> Would the same policy applied as to, say, the Python add-ons? e.g. >> "if the name starts with [pP]y then you don't need the python- prefix". > >> In this case, "pg" would clearly indicate that it's to be used with >> PostgreSQL. > > Please do NOT give it a name starting with "postgresql-". That would > cause great confusion because people couldn't tell which RPMs originate > with postgresql itself and which originate from other packages. As Michel said there are many packages in the repo starts with postgresql-*, all of them are not a part of the actual postgresql. Eg: postgresql-pgpool We need to correct them as well, if possible :) > > I don't see anything much wrong with "pgrouting" as the package name. > > regards, tom lane > -- > packaging mailing list > packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging > Thanks Viji -- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
