I'm currently reviewing pgRouting: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652533
the packager is currently using "postgresql-pgrouting" as the name, which is alright but a bit long. There does not seem to be a policy for naming DB add-ons yet (though I see a couple of postgresql-* packages).
Would the same policy applied as to, say, the Python add-ons? e.g. "if the name starts with [pP]y then you don't need the python- prefix".
In this case, "pg" would clearly indicate that it's to be used with PostgreSQL.
Thanks,
On 11/12/2010 12:47 PM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
I'm currently reviewing pgRouting: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652533
the packager is currently using "postgresql-pgrouting" as the name, which is alright but a bit long. There does not seem to be a policy for naming DB add-ons yet (though I see a couple of postgresql-* packages).
Would the same policy applied as to, say, the Python add-ons? e.g. "if the name starts with [pP]y then you don't need the python- prefix".
In this case, "pg" would clearly indicate that it's to be used with PostgreSQL.
I think a case could be made for an exception, yes (though our guidelines don't explicitly mention the postgresql/pg case yet).
-- Rex
Michel Alexandre Salim salimma@fedoraproject.org writes:
I'm currently reviewing pgRouting: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652533
the packager is currently using "postgresql-pgrouting" as the name, which is alright but a bit long. There does not seem to be a policy for naming DB add-ons yet (though I see a couple of postgresql-* packages).
Would the same policy applied as to, say, the Python add-ons? e.g. "if the name starts with [pP]y then you don't need the python- prefix".
In this case, "pg" would clearly indicate that it's to be used with PostgreSQL.
Please do NOT give it a name starting with "postgresql-". That would cause great confusion because people couldn't tell which RPMs originate with postgresql itself and which originate from other packages.
I don't see anything much wrong with "pgrouting" as the package name.
regards, tom lane
On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 12:45 AM, Tom Lane tgl@redhat.com wrote:
Michel Alexandre Salim salimma@fedoraproject.org writes:
I'm currently reviewing pgRouting: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652533
the packager is currently using "postgresql-pgrouting" as the name, which is alright but a bit long. There does not seem to be a policy for naming DB add-ons yet (though I see a couple of postgresql-* packages).
Would the same policy applied as to, say, the Python add-ons? e.g. "if the name starts with [pP]y then you don't need the python- prefix".
In this case, "pg" would clearly indicate that it's to be used with PostgreSQL.
Please do NOT give it a name starting with "postgresql-". That would cause great confusion because people couldn't tell which RPMs originate with postgresql itself and which originate from other packages.
As Michel said there are many packages in the repo starts with postgresql-*, all of them are not a part of the actual postgresql. Eg: postgresql-pgpool
We need to correct them as well, if possible :)
I don't see anything much wrong with "pgrouting" as the package name.
regards, tom lane
packaging mailing list packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
Thanks Viji
On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 00:50:08 +0530, Viji V Nair wrote:
On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 12:45 AM, Tom Lane tgl@redhat.com wrote:
Please do NOT give it a name starting with "postgresql-". That would cause great confusion because people couldn't tell which RPMs originate with postgresql itself and which originate from other packages.
As Michel said there are many packages in the repo starts with postgresql-*, all of them are not a part of the actual postgresql. Eg: postgresql-pgpool
We need to correct them as well, if possible :)
Yup. pgRouting also provides rules for doing Debian packages, but there does not appear to be any official Debian release yet:
http://packages.debian.org/search? keywords=pgrouting&searchon=all&suite=all§ion=all
so we don't have to follow their postgresql-X.Y-pgrouting naming. In any case, the Debian situation is probably different enough, in that they have several PostgreSQL versions (like we have two Python stacks) and parallel-installable PostgreSQL-dependent packages have to be prefixed to avoid confusion.
In this case I'd defer to Tom as both a PostgreSQL developer and a Red Hat employee :)
Thanks,
On 11/12/2010 02:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Michel Alexandre Salim salimma@fedoraproject.org writes:
I'm currently reviewing pgRouting: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652533
the packager is currently using "postgresql-pgrouting" as the name, which is alright but a bit long. There does not seem to be a policy for naming DB add-ons yet (though I see a couple of postgresql-* packages).
Would the same policy applied as to, say, the Python add-ons? e.g. "if the name starts with [pP]y then you don't need the python- prefix".
In this case, "pg" would clearly indicate that it's to be used with PostgreSQL.
Please do NOT give it a name starting with "postgresql-". That would cause great confusion because people couldn't tell which RPMs originate with postgresql itself and which originate from other packages.
I don't see anything much wrong with "pgrouting" as the package name.
There is no formal policy in this space, so it is up to the package maintainers to use their best judgement when naming the package. The guidelines say:
When naming a package, the name should match the upstream tarball or project name from which this software came. In some cases, this naming choice may be more complicated. If this package has been packaged by other distributions/packagers in the past, then you should try to match their name for consistency. In any case, try to use your best judgement, and other developers will help in the final decision.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#General_Naming
~spot
On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 14:15 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Please do NOT give it a name starting with "postgresql-". That would cause great confusion because people couldn't tell which RPMs originate with postgresql itself and which originate from other packages.
I don't see anything much wrong with "pgrouting" as the package name.
+1.
Also, FWIW, I've been maintaining PgRouting in PostgreSQL RPM repository already, and I'm using pgrouting there.
Regards,
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Devrim Gündüz -
Michel Alexandre Salim -
Rex Dieter -
Tom Callaway -
Tom Lane -
Viji V Nair