[Draft] The use of alternatives

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

Hi.

The UsingAlternatives draft[1] should now be ready for voting at the next
meeting. I've just made some finishing touches. I'd like to include
it in the agenda for the next FPC meeting.

Regards,
R.

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/UsingAlternatives

[Jussi Lehtola]

On Tue, 2009-04-07 at 22:51 +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> Hi.
>
> The UsingAlternatives draft[1] should now be ready for voting at the next
> meeting. I've just made some finishing touches. I'd like to include
> it in the agenda for the next FPC meeting.
>
> Regards,
> R.
>
> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/UsingAlternatives

Maybe add a note about cases where the use of alternatives is NOT
recommended and environment-modules should be used instead, e.g. MPI
environments and so on. [Generally cases where multiple versions and
variants that offer different functionality need to be useable at the
same time.]

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Tuesday, 07 April 2009 at 23:06, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-04-07 at 22:51 +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > The UsingAlternatives draft[1] should now be ready for voting at the next
> > meeting. I've just made some finishing touches. I'd like to include
> > it in the agenda for the next FPC meeting.
> >
> > Regards,
> > R.
> >
> > [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/UsingAlternatives
>
> Maybe add a note about cases where the use of alternatives is NOT
> recommended and environment-modules should be used instead, e.g. MPI
> environments and so on. [Generally cases where multiple versions and
> variants that offer different functionality need to be useable at the
> same time.]

Done. Sorry it took so long.

Regards,
R.

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Tuesday, 14 April 2009 at 19:09, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> On Tuesday, 07 April 2009 at 23:06, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-04-07 at 22:51 +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> > > Hi.
> > >
> > > The UsingAlternatives draft[1] should now be ready for voting at the next
> > > meeting. I've just made some finishing touches. I'd like to include
> > > it in the agenda for the next FPC meeting.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > R.
> > >
> > > [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/UsingAlternatives
> >
> > Maybe add a note about cases where the use of alternatives is NOT
> > recommended and environment-modules should be used instead, e.g. MPI
> > environments and so on. [Generally cases where multiple versions and
> > variants that offer different functionality need to be useable at the
> > same time.]
>
> Done. Sorry it took so long.

... although I couldn't actually mention environment-modules in the guideline
because their use is not documented in the Packaging Guidelines. Would you
be willing to write up a guideline with some examples, Jussi?

Regards,
R.

[Miroslav Lichvar]

On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 10:51:33PM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> The UsingAlternatives draft[1] should now be ready for voting at the next
> meeting. I've just made some finishing touches. I'd like to include
> it in the agenda for the next FPC meeting.
>
> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/UsingAlternatives

I was considering %ghosting the files provided by alternatives in my
packages (postfix and sendmail), but I'm not sure how to do the
migration without breaking upgrades/removals.

When only one installed package from the alternatives group uses
%ghost, removing the package will remove also the symlinks. Is there a
command that could be used in postun to restore the symlinks and not
change auto/manual mode?

Thanks,