Aloas,
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#head-8756a3bce652c3... states:
| There is an exception to this rule. If the upstream source has "py" | (or "Py") in its name, you can use that name for the package.
Maybe there should be another exception when upstream includes python it its name, e.g. fuse-python[1]. Should this be packaged as python-fuse or can it stay with upstream's name fuse-python? Should it provide python-fuse in case it stays with its upstream name?
Regards, Till
[1] Review Request: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=250904
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 16:32 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
Aloas,
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#head-8756a3bce652c3... states:
| There is an exception to this rule. If the upstream source has "py" | (or "Py") in its name, you can use that name for the package.
Maybe there should be another exception when upstream includes python it its name, e.g. fuse-python[1]. Should this be packaged as python-fuse or can it stay with upstream's name fuse-python? Should it provide python-fuse in case it stays with its upstream name?
Does fuse-python have "py" in its name? If so, you can use that name for the package. ;)
~spot
On Thursday 06 September 2007, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 16:32 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
Aloas,
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#head-8756a3bce65 2c376d7ba3908461b638784b6952d
states: | There is an exception to this rule. If the upstream source has "py" | (or "Py") in its name, you can use that name for the package.
Maybe there should be another exception when upstream includes python it its name, e.g. fuse-python[1]. Should this be packaged as python-fuse or can it stay with upstream's name fuse-python? Should it provide python-fuse in case it stays with its upstream name?
Does fuse-python have "py" in its name? If so, you can use that name for the package. ;)
I would personally call it python-fuse anyway for consistency, and perhaps add "Provides: fuse-python = VR", but maybe that's just me.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Ville Skyttä wrote:
On Thursday 06 September 2007, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 16:32 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
Aloas,
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#head-8756a3bce65 2c376d7ba3908461b638784b6952d
states: | There is an exception to this rule. If the upstream source has "py" | (or "Py") in its name, you can use that name for the package.
Maybe there should be another exception when upstream includes python it its name, e.g. fuse-python[1]. Should this be packaged as python-fuse or can it stay with upstream's name fuse-python? Should it provide python-fuse in case it stays with its upstream name?
Does fuse-python have "py" in its name? If so, you can use that name for the package. ;)
I would personally call it python-fuse anyway for consistency, and perhaps add "Provides: fuse-python = VR", but maybe that's just me.
+1
In fact, I remember discussing removing the "py in the name" exception at one of the meetings. Might not have come to a vote, though.
- -Toshio
On Do September 6 2007, Ville Skyttä wrote:
I would personally call it python-fuse anyway for consistency, and perhaps add "Provides: fuse-python = VR", but maybe that's just me.
Is doing it the other way round not good enough?
Name: fuse-python Provides: python-fuse = VR
Regards, Till
On Friday 07 September 2007, Till Maas wrote:
On Do September 6 2007, Ville Skyttä wrote:
I would personally call it python-fuse anyway for consistency, and perhaps add "Provides: fuse-python = VR", but maybe that's just me.
Is doing it the other way round not good enough?
Name: fuse-python Provides: python-fuse = VR
Good enough for whom? Both of those definitely satisfy the current naming guidelines, but personally in cases like this I always go for "if it's bar for foo, or bar used from foo or the like, its Name: is foo-bar", ie this one would become python-fuse (assuming I guess correctly what the package contains).
On Fr September 7 2007, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On Friday 07 September 2007, Till Maas wrote:
On Do September 6 2007, Ville Skyttä wrote:
I would personally call it python-fuse anyway for consistency, and perhaps add "Provides: fuse-python = VR", but maybe that's just me.
Is doing it the other way round not good enough?
Name: fuse-python Provides: python-fuse = VR
Good enough for whom? Both of those definitely satisfy the current naming
Good enough for a user, will there be any differences if one uses yum to search for "fuse-python" or "python-fuse" or will both produce the same result?
Regards, Till
On Fri, 2007-09-07 at 22:03 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
On Fr September 7 2007, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On Friday 07 September 2007, Till Maas wrote:
On Do September 6 2007, Ville Skyttä wrote:
I would personally call it python-fuse anyway for consistency, and perhaps add "Provides: fuse-python = VR", but maybe that's just me.
Is doing it the other way round not good enough?
Name: fuse-python Provides: python-fuse = VR
Good enough for whom? Both of those definitely satisfy the current naming
Good enough for a user, will there be any differences if one uses yum to search for "fuse-python" or "python-fuse" or will both produce the same result?
I don't think that yum search looks through provides, but I could be wrong on that. Should be easy enough to test (run repoquery on the one package, point yum at the new "repo" and run a search).
~spot
On Sat, 2007-09-08 at 19:22 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
Le samedi 08 septembre 2007 à 13:04 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway a écrit :
I don't think that yum search looks through provides,
- It doesn't (yum-3.2.4-4.fc8.noarch)
- It probably should
Someone more motivated (e.g not me!) should either try to patch this into yum, or should at least open a bug against yum for this item. :)
~spot
Le samedi 08 septembre 2007 à 13:30 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway a écrit :
On Sat, 2007-09-08 at 19:22 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
Le samedi 08 septembre 2007 à 13:04 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway a écrit :
I don't think that yum search looks through provides,
- It doesn't (yum-3.2.4-4.fc8.noarch)
- It probably should
Someone more motivated (e.g not me!) should either try to patch this into yum, or should at least open a bug against yum for this item. :)
→ https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=283611
Gwawawaaa
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org