2011/12/7 Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger@xxxxxxxxx>: > On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 03:09:32PM +0100, Thomas Spura wrote: >> Hi list, >> >> I'm the maintainer of python-zmq and it would be nice, if I could use >> it also on el5, but I need python26 for that. >> >> Would it be ok, to use it and provide a python26-zmq or is an extra >> review request needed for that? >> Couldn't find any guideline, that forbits it, but there doesn't seem >> to be any naming guideline for el, isn't it? >> > There aren't proper guidelines for this but there is this page: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Python26#Packaging_Guidelines_for_EPEL5 > > Here's the caveats: dmalcolm is in favor of combined packaging when > possible (ie, in the non-RHEL/EPEL split case) for packager convenience. > I'm in favor of split packages for the reasons given on that page. > > It sounds like you're thinking python-zmq won't exist on EPEL6, only the > python26-zmq subpackage. With that in mind, only the bugzilla consideration > seems to apply. python-zmq already is in EPEL6. It's missing in EPEL5 because python2.4 is too old and not supported: http://lists.zeromq.org/pipermail/zeromq-dev/2010-November/007597.html So * python-zmq will never exist in EPEL5 (unless someone will fork upstream and make it work with python2.4) or * python-zmq will contain and provide python26-zmq or * there will only be python26-zmq The draft guidelines for EPEL5 don't cover this case... (I would prefer the providing solution 2 above, unless someone objects...) Greetings, Tom -- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
