[Fedora-packaging] packaging Digest, Vol 102, Issue 15
a.badger at gmail.com
Sat Aug 17 18:15:47 UTC 2013
On Aug 17, 2013 9:00 AM, "Jonathan De Wachter" <dewachter.jonathan at gmail.com>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 19:13:23 +0200
>> From: Michael Schwendt <mschwendt at gmail.com>
>> To: <packaging at lists.fedoraproject.org>
>> Subject: [Fedora-packaging] Package naming guidelines
>> Message-ID: <20130816191323.09aee25e at faldor.intranet>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>> Bad timing as weekend has arrived for many, but please, I would
>> comments on this one *and* the earlier feedback in the ticket:
>> -> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/997679#c14
>> > Ralf Corsepius 2013-08-16 11:56:46 EDT
>> > You are forcing me to do something I've never done in Fedora before:
>> > (With my FPC-member hat on) This rename request violates the FPG,
>> > because the upstream zip-ball is called SFML,
>> > ...
>> > Source0:
>> > ...
>> > It therefore MUST NOT be ACCEPTED.
I disagree very strongly with Ralph's interpretation of the guidelines.
Past discussion on the fpc has even contemplated starting that package
names should be all lowercase. Iirc, the present wording was meant to
present lowercase add a default but still allow maintainers to use mixed
case when upstream projects were strongly associated with the mixed case
version of the name.
I don't recall the tarball to name mapping ever coming up before in the
context of case. I think that section referred more to the letters used
rather than the characters (ie: es-ef-em-el in this instance. Whether
upper case or lower case is not covered by that.)
Since he, limburgher (replied on ticket), rdieter (former fpc member), and
I are in disagreement about the interpretation, it's probably wise to open
a ticket to clarify this on the fpc trac instance.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the packaging