On 10/08/2013 07:18 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 7.10.2013 22:24, Toshio Kuratomi napsal(a):
* Instead we could build for the main Fedora Repo. If we do this, the
spec
file, git repo name, and srpm package name all need to match. That
means
we'd have a separate git-level package for each package+scl
combination.
So if we had scl-php5.6 and we needed a php and php-gettext package
for it
we'd need separate git-level packages named scl-php5.6-php and
scl-php5.6-php-gettext.
This goes exactly against the basic premise on which SCL were build and
that is: "The SCL package must be buildable from the very same .spec
file into regular package as well as SCL package.".
I'm not following SCL in Fedora, but even the first way suggested by
Toshio is against this basic premise. When you have another .spec file
in extra branch, it's not the "very same .spec file" and I actually
don't see any reason why SCL spec file should be buildable as non-SCL
package (unless we decide to build them from "very same branch" -
meaning that you would have single .spec file in "f19" branch and build
it twice - once as SCL and once as normal package). I don't see use-case
for this.
I agree it could be easier to maintain the packages this way, but for
bigger packages like php it's just lot of extra conditionals which makes
the maintenance harder.
If I'm right, this basic premise is SHOULD (not MUST) in current guidelines.
Vít
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
Jan Kaluza
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
