On Monday, 04 November 2019 at 23:38, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 5:26 PM Stephen John Smoogen
<smooge(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> So I started to review
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1767883 which is a package
> which is normally in the zlib package but has been commented out from
> shipping on RHEL-8. It is needed for chromium and other items so Tom
> Callaway has made up a package for it. However the naming guidelines
> for packages have deprecated -compat packages even though this seems
> to have been added after that rule was put in place.
>
> In reviewing the package the name was the only thing which came up and
> i would like to give it a pass versus having it renamed to minizip1.2
> (or better yet libminizip since all it is a library) untl the upstream
> zlib package is named that way also.
>
Honestly, it should probably be fixed in Fedora to be minizip1 /
minizip1-devel instead of minizip-compat / minizip-compat-devel...
But I guess that as long as it's not that in Fedora, it's fine to be
not it in EPEL...
I'd use the correct name and add Provides with what's in Fedora to
be removed when Fedora package is renamed. I don't see a good reason
not to do it properly when you have a chance. Dropping Provides: is
easier than package renaming.
Regards,
Dominik
--
Fedora
https://getfedora.org | RPM Fusion
http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan