[Fedora-packaging] SCL in Fedora

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 11:34:58AM +0100, Marcela Mašláňová wrote:
> On 31/10/13 17:22, Matthew Miller wrote:
> >On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 08:47:48AM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> >>A prefix is necessary to make the scl packages unique from non-scl packages.
> >
> >As a sysadmin, this seems obvious to me. Marcela, can you explain the
> >reasoning in _not_ doing it?
> >
> >
> Packages are already unique. They have prefix e.g. ruby193. If we
> force packagers add scl-ruby193 prefix, would it be more unique?
> To not have two same names for collection should be solved by Change
> proposal approved probably by FESCo.
> 
python2.6   -- mainstream compat package
python2.6-requests -- requests module built for the mainstream compat package

python2.6 -- python2.6 SCL metapackage name that you seem to be
    proposing.  Naming conflict is obvious here.
scl-python2.6 -- python2.6 SCL metapackage with no naming conflict.

scl-python2.6-python-requests -- The horrible name that I believe you are
    refering to.  This is controlled by the following portion of the
    proposed Guideline:

    Name must be modified like this:
    -Name:           foo
    +Name:           %{?scl_prefix}foo

python2.6-python-requests -- The almost as horrible name that I believe you
    wish to use instead.  This is the result of removing the prefix denoting
    that this is not a mainstream package from %scl_prefix.  Note that with
    the current macros in place this would still leave the metapackage name
    conflicting.  To rectify that I'm guessing that you want to change the
    definition of %scl_prefix something like this:

    -%global scl_name>------->-------%{scl}
    +%global scl_name>------->-------%(echo %{scl}| sed s/^scl-//)

scl-python2.6-requests -- My preferred name for the scl packaged requests
    module as it actually removes the redundant information (we already know
    this is a python module) instead of the helpful information (now we know
    that this is a package that is part of an scl).  This is can be
    expressed via a change to the proposed Guidelines.  Instead of
    specifying that general scl package names must be
    %{scl_prefix}python-foo we can specify that scl package names can be
    %{scl_prefix}foo.  I think we'll need to reference the addon package
    naming guidelines to explain how people should do this.

    Something like: In general, Name is constructed by prepending scl_prefix
    to the existing package name like this [example].  However, to avoid
    redundancy, addon packages should remove the information that is
    already present in the scl_prefix like this:
      # If scl_prefix is scl-python2.6 then
      %if %{scl_prefix}
      Name: %{scl_prefix}foo
      %else
      Name: python-foo
      %endif

-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/packaging/attachments/20131101/50fff9b6/attachment.sig>