> That may be true, but unbundling is IMHO still the right thing to do. > Using compat libs would result in a whole bunch of packages, one for each versioned version. It is. Although I would rather like to have support for multiple versions of packages in dnf (and associated tools) which would address this and also our RubyGems usecase. Putting the versions in the name of packages just doesn't feel right. Having too many versions of jquery-something is another story. And that still doesn't solve a custom-built versions of JS libs. Josef ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matthias Runge" <mrunge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Friday, August 29, 2014 12:12:00 PM Subject: Re: jquery-ui packaging for use in OpenStack-Dashboard On 29/08/14 10:18, Josef Stribny wrote: > I think that we will have a hard time to use unbundled JS libs for > all the packages. For instance I already submitted > rubygem-jquery-ui-rails[0] for a review. It bundles 1.11.0 which is > something between latest and the version you want to depend on. > That's one of the reasons I didn't unbundle it for my package. Seems > like even for two packages (mine and yours) it's already hard to use > the same version (and try to submit a review for the latest version > at the same time)..... > > Josef > > > [0] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1122939 > That may be true, but unbundling is IMHO still the right thing to do. Debian was able to do it as well, and their constraints are currently a bit harder than ours, as they already have dependencies on their included version. Matthias -- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging -- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
