Here are the list of recent changes to the Fedora Packaging Guidelines:
D Packaging Guidelines have been added: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:D
---
The Java Packaging Guidelines have been revised: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java Diff: https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Packaging%3AJava&diff=206526...
---
The Guideline that explains how and when to require base packages has been substantially revised. The old language focused on -devel packages and left other subpackages to the imagination of the reader. The update has more generic advice and uses -devel and -libs packages as examples.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#RequiringBasePackage
---
The perl guidelines have been updated with additional examples and clarifications. Specifically, the Directory ownership, requires and provides, and testing sections have seen wording changes:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Perl
---
A guideline was added explaining the %pretrans scriptlet and requiring that if used it must be written in Lua.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#The_.25pretrans_scriptle...
---
A note was added about additional checks obtained by running rpmlint on installed packages.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Use_rpmlint
---
These guidelines (and changes) were approved by the Fedora Packaging Committee (FPC).
Many thanks to Alexander Kurtakov, Jonathan Mercier, Stanislav Ochotnicky and all of the members of the FPC, for assisting in drafting, refining, and passing these guidelines.
As a reminder: The Fedora Packaging Guidelines are living documents! If you find something missing, incorrect, or in need of revision, you can suggest a draft change. The procedure for this is documented here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Committee#GuidelineChangeProcedure
Thanks,
~spot _______________________________________________ devel-announce mailing list devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel-announce
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 09:23:49 -0500, "Tom "spot" Callaway" tcallawa@redhat.com wrote:
Here are the list of recent changes to the Fedora Packaging Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java Diff: https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Packaging%3AJava&diff=206526...
Should we do new releases for this, or just make changes when doing an update for other reasons? In my case I have some gjc stuff, that should be dropped according to the updated guidelines.
On 10:51:26 pm Wednesday, November 17, 2010 Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 09:23:49 -0500,
"Tom "spot" Callaway" tcallawa@redhat.com wrote:
Here are the list of recent changes to the Fedora Packaging Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java Diff: https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Packaging%3AJava&diff=206526... oldid=154023
Should we do new releases for this, or just make changes when doing an update for other reasons? In my case I have some gjc stuff, that should be dropped according to the updated guidelines.
I think that it should be fine if you do the changes when you have other reasons too.
Alexander Kurtakov
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Tom "spot" Callaway tcallawa@redhat.com wrote:
The Java Packaging Guidelines have been revised: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java Diff: https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Packaging%3AJava&diff=206526...
It seems that the %jpackage_script tip/guideline did not make it into this revision, was there a reason for that or did it just fall through the cracks? See point 2 in http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2010-November/144957.html
"VS" == Ville Skyttä ville.skytta@iki.fi writes:
VS> It seems that the %jpackage_script tip/guideline did not make it VS> into this revision, was there a reason for that or did it just fall VS> through the cracks?
That was not part of the draft which we considered. Currently there are no Java-related drafts pending before FPC, although when I talked to the Java SIG folks on IRC they indicated that would be preparing another draft in the future.
- J<
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 06:16:14PM +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Tom "spot" Callaway tcallawa@redhat.com wrote:
The Java Packaging Guidelines have been revised: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java Diff: https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Packaging%3AJava&diff=206526...
It seems that the %jpackage_script tip/guideline did not make it into this revision, was there a reason for that or did it just fall through the cracks? See point 2 in http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2010-November/144957.html
My impression is that the Java SIG foks wanted to get the changes they had ready approved but they have more coming soon. I'll see if I can find them on IRC to confirm.
-Toshio
On 07:33:18 pm Friday, November 19, 2010 Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 06:16:14PM +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Tom "spot" Callaway
tcallawa@redhat.com wrote:
The Java Packaging Guidelines have been revised: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java Diff: https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Packaging%3AJava&diff=20652 6&oldid=154023
It seems that the %jpackage_script tip/guideline did not make it into this revision, was there a reason for that or did it just fall through the cracks? See point 2 in http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2010-November/144957.html
My impression is that the Java SIG foks wanted to get the changes they had ready approved but they have more coming soon. I'll see if I can find them on IRC to confirm.
I confirm this. We will have new one as soon as maven 3 is into Fedora.
Alex
-Toshio
On 11/19/2010 06:15 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 06:16:14PM +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Tom "spot" Callaway tcallawa@redhat.com wrote:
The Java Packaging Guidelines have been revised: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java Diff: https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Packaging%3AJava&diff=206526...
It seems that the %jpackage_script tip/guideline did not make it into this revision, was there a reason for that or did it just fall through the cracks? See point 2 in http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2010-November/144957.html
My impression is that the Java SIG foks wanted to get the changes they had ready approved but they have more coming soon. I'll see if I can find them on IRC to confirm.
No need to :-)
Yes we plan further improvements/additions.
Ville: The jpackage_script macro is great and we'll be adding it to the documentation. You are welcome to add it to [1], since I think you know most about it so a few lines describing how it works would be best. We'll be continuing our work on Java guidelines there so feel free to add things/comment. At least some SIG members are watching the page.
We didn't include it in latest packaging guidelines updates because we decided to "catch" next-day meeting of FPC to approve what we already had prepared. And no one really knew about that nice macro :-)
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Akurtakov/JavaPackagingDraftUpdate
On Friday 19 November 2010, Stanislav Ochotnicky wrote:
Ville: The jpackage_script macro is great and we'll be adding it to the documentation. You are welcome to add it to [1], since I think you know most about it so a few lines describing how it works would be best.
Done, https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=User:Akurtakov/JavaPackagingDraf...