On 11/01/2013 05:36 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 03:37:21AM -0400, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
----- Original Message -----
A prefix is necessary to make the scl packages unique from non-scl packages.
I did mention that the downstream naming was wrong and would need to be
changed a long time ago.
I could find places where you mentioned that it was wrong, but I didn't find any reasoning. Could you please state why you think the downstream naming is wrong?
Just replied to mmaslano -- I believe I've only mentioned it onlist because
I discussed it with mmaslano on IRC and with langdon in #scl on freenode
when doing the initial review of the draft. Apologies for that, I assumed
from mmaslano's comments that there was an scl team that was actively
discussing a prefix (using a vendor) and that she would carry back the
rationale as to why no prefix wouldn't work.
-Toshio
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
Yeah, we were discussing some vendor prefix to make a distinction
between collections with same content and same name. We were thinking
about user or vendor not general scl.
We are still discussing the best way, because currently redefinition of
/opt/vendor is not nice. There is needed a fix in scl-utils:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=985336
Marcela
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
