[Fedora-packaging] SCL in Fedora

[Marcela Mašláňová]

On 11/01/2013 05:33 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> 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
>
>
>
> --
> packaging mailing list
> packaging at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
>
If I understand correctly you want to remove part of the name to make 
the name shorter. I disagree. The prefix marks packages as beeing part 
of a collection. Also what would happen if someone build it without 
prefix? It would bring more confusion than good.

Marcela