Re: [Fedora-packaging] Java Naming Page
On 7/14/06, Enrico Scholz <enrico.scholz(a)informatik.tu-chemnitz.de> wrote:
toshio(a)tiki-lounge.com (Toshio Kuratomi) writes:
> http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/JavaPackageNaming
>
> Feel free to review it and see if I've missed anything, misstated the
> effects of naming according to a certain proposal, etc.
| 1. Allow for upgrading between the Fedora and JPackage repositories so
| that upgrade paths similar to the following works:
This will be needed for the first installation of a Java package from FE
only. Then, I see the following two situations:
1. user enabled on FE repository
--> jpackage versioning is uninteresting
2. user enabled both FE and JPackage repositories
--> When FE packager is a little bit behind, jpackage packages will
override FE packags again. This would render JPackages in FE
useless.
General versioniong rules for mixing repositories are impossible so I
suggest to ignore the jpackage Release: resp. just make sure that first
FE package wins against the original JPackage package.
| 2. Allow packagers to tell what JPackage release the java package was
| based against.
I do not think that this must be expressed with Release:; you could
document this somewhere else (%description) or write
| Provides: jpackage(%name) = %jpackage_version-%jpackage_release
Would it be better to look at the java packages being a seperate repo
with its own naming standards? Anaconda could aim at these packages in
their own on disk repo and a fuller jpackage repo could be included on
the download sites.
--
Stephen J Smoogen.
CSIRT/Linux System Administrator