package, package2, package3 naming-with-version exploit

[Florian Festi]

On 04/03/2013 12:58 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> The only thing you get wrong is that you take a look at Fedora packages
> and do some statistics. You don't see the packages which could be in
> Fedora if RPM/YUM would do better job.
> 
> Just as an example, I guess everybody would welcome Redmine [1] in
> Fedora (you can substitute GitLab [2] or Aeolus [3] for Redmine if you
> like). It was not possible to do so for several releases of Fedora,
> since Redmine was using Ruby on Rails 2.3 where in Fedora, there was
> Ruby on Rails 3.x. If we would like to move to Ruby on Rails 4 in Fedora
> as soon as they'll be releases, we will have actually two options (1)
> forget about the upgrade of Ruby on Rails in Fedora and wait for
> upstream or possible become upstream, to help with migration of the
> project (2) break Redmine and every application which is using Ruby on
> Rails in Fedora. Neither of these options are good options. So the
> easiest solution is to not have Redmine in Fedora at all.
> 
> So now, please, could you count also the cost of missed opportunities?

I have some difficulties believing that the only reason for this is that
the name "rubygem-rails" was already taken. May be you can elaborate a
bit more why getting Rails 2.3 into Fedora would have been fundamentally
easier if the name was still available?

Florian