On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski dominik@greysector.net wrote:
On Thursday, 16 February 2017 at 23:30, Markus Elfring wrote:
Having a version in the package name should be used only in case of different parallel-installable major versions of the same software.
How often would you like to support parallel installation before a subsequent major version will become generally available?
Why would we want to support parallel installation of something that isn't available? I don't understand the question.
It's been quite common. Major component updates often discard libraries that are required for other stable, existing components that have not yet been updated with nor are compatible with the newer versions and that may be desirable for developers on an existing stable Fedora release. Examples that leap to mind include gcc, RT, openssl, and Python.
It would be nice if packages were named consistently across RPM-based distributions, but what's your point?
How do you think about possible consequences around a package name like “libXss1”? https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file/openSUSE:Factory/libXScrnSaver/...
Again, I don't get your point at all. libXScrnSaver is packaged in Fedora already.
PS. Obviously, English isn't your primary language and there's a communication barrier here, because I don't understand what you're trying to say at all. Please try to be clearer, maybe by phrasing your questions in a different way. Alternatively, you can come talk to us on IRC. Real-time communications usually yield better results.
Regards, Dominik -- Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org "Faith manages." -- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations" _______________________________________________ packaging mailing list -- packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to packaging-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org