On Thu, 09 Jan 2014 13:38:16 -0500, James Antill wrote: > http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2014-01-09/fpc.2014-01-09-16.59.log.html > 17:53:34 * RemiFedora can't find where confusion is. Current guidelines seems > clear about "a now removed exception" Remi, the Wiki page has been updated by Toshio three weeks ago already! That's why it is _better_ and less confusing already, but not perfect. See page history: https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Packaging%3ANamingGuidelines&diff=364793&oldid=363395 > 17:54:02 <abadger1999> yeah -- I think it's just the examples that he wants clarified. Yes, as explained in the ticket, they have lead to confusion in the gstreamer1-python review ticket. Note that *I* would have applied the %parent-%child nameing guidelines for that package, but the package submitter derived the package name from the examples and the _existing_ gstreamer-python package. The guidelines also don't tell that the old packages need not be renamed. The meeting log also adds something new, and that is new subpackages for Python 3 may keep the old base name and need not prepend the python3- prefix. That would be a clarification item, too. > 17:55:01 <tibbs|w> I don't know; there's that wall of text but nothing > actually saying what he'd like changed. Only the FPC knows what naming scheme they want to be applied. I'm not fond of the enforced %parent-%child scheme and would prefer staying closer to upstream names. > 17:55:50 <tibbs|w> So, yeah, clarify the examples as much as possible but > don't actually change any guidelines unless someone tosses in a proposal > for what they actually want changed. To drop from the examples the packages that apply the old naming scheme and replace them with any packages that apply a python- prefix and follow current guidelines. Use "python-foo" as a last resort. > 17:58:54 <tibbs|w> I'm sure we'll get complaints (and still no draft) if > that wasn't what was being requested. The only one who complains here is you. :( Be thankful that I've taken the time to inform the FPC about the confusion. Why publish such guidelines and lots of text about %parent-%child relationship, if there is no real interest in getting packagers/reviewers to follow those guidelines? Who cares whether the package is named gst-python or gstreamer-python or python-gstreamer? -- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
