[Fedora-music-list] Naming of Ardour packages

[Brian Monroe]

Is it possible to have a dnf alias, so when users "dnf install ardour" it
will select ardour4 (or whatever the current package is) That could provide
some ease-of-install without needing to maintain a meta package.

On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 1:48 PM Nils Philippsen <nils at redhat.com> wrote:

> Hi Brian,
>
> On Fri, 2015-05-08 at 18:08 +0000, Brian Monroe wrote:
> > Looking at the wiki guide the way suggested is to :
> >
> > The most current version: ardour
> > Previous version names: ardour2 (or ardour3.5)
> >
> >
> > This would differ from having ardour be a meta package.
>
> having the latest version packaged as "ardour" would making introducing
> the next major version into stable Fedora releases a hassle. Say ardour
> were version 4, then introducing version 5 would require creating
> ardour4, obsoleting ardour <= ... so existing users aren't upgraded to
> the new version (which may be incompatible). All existing users would
> have to get an update just to follow the name change.
>
> Thinking further about it, having a meta package that only pulls in the
> latest ardour major version when it arrives is kind of overkill. The
> most simple way is probably just having ardourN packages for each major
> version. If, like with the version 3 and 4, the session file formats are
> compatible between versions, we can retire the older version in upcoming
> Fedora releases, i.e. in the current case, retire ardour3 from Fedora 22
> on.
>
> Nils
>
> > On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 10:55 AM Martin Tarenskeen
> > <m.tarenskeen at zonnet.nl> wrote:
> >
> >
> >         On Fri, 8 May 2015, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
> >
> >         >> - Move version 2 to its own ardour2 package. This would get
> >         it
> >         >> re-reviewed but I guess that's a mere formality.
> >         >> - Reuse the ardour package as a meta-package which simply
> >         requires the
> >         >> latest versioned package.
> >         >> - Retire ardour3.
> >         >>
> >         >> What do you think?
> >         >
> >         >
> >         > I think retiring ardour3 at this point is too early - I for
> >         one am
> >         > still adjusting to the ardour4 interface.
> >
> >
> >         There should be some consistency in the naming and versioning
> >         of packages.
> >         A crazy example is rosegarden: Now version 14.02 and the name
> >         is ...
> >         rosegarden4 :-)
> >
> >         --
> >
> >         MT
> >
> >         _______________________________________________
> >         music mailing list
> >         music at lists.fedoraproject.org
> >         https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/music
> > _______________________________________________
> > music mailing list
> > music at lists.fedoraproject.org
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/music
>
> --
> Nils Philippsen      "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase
> Red Hat               a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty
> nils at redhat.com       nor Safety."  --  Benjamin Franklin, 1759
> PGP fingerprint:      C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F  656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/music/attachments/20150508/7a6dd426/attachment.html>