Django packages - proposed name changes

[Michel Alexandre Salim]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 02/27/2012 08:28 AM, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
>> 
>> On 18/01/12 14:01, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
>>> It seems actually, that there are pretty straightforward 
>>> guidelines for renaming packages:
>>> 
>>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Renaming_Process#Re-review_required
>>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>> 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Renaming.2FReplacing_Existing_Packages
>>> 
>>> So if renaming, we will _have to_ re-review. Also, the 
>>> guidelines are pretty clear with the Provides and Obsoletes,
>>> so it shouldn't really be a problem.
>>> 
>>> Bohuslav.
>>> 
>> OK,
>> 
>> if renaming is consence, we should implement it right after 
>> branching F17 in devel-tree.
>> 
>> Probably one should write an example .spec, especially taking 
>> care on sane requires, provides.
>> 
>> Maybe we should make a wiki page to coordinate this step 
>> (overview, which package is required to change, which is
>> changed, etc.
>> 
>> Bohuslav, would you start such a page? We could divide up 
>> reviews. I would volunteer to do some reviews.
>> 
>> Matthias
> 
> Hi guys, so it seems that we should get this started now, when we 
> have plenty of time for Fedora. I was thinking about this a lot
> and here is what I came up with: 1) We should create a fpc ticket,
> that would summarize what we want to do, and more importantly, it
> would ask fpc to add a section about Django and its plugins to
> Python packaging guidelines. 2) Then, after approved by fpc, I will
> create a wiki page that will hold the list of Django
> plugins/extensions, that were/were not renamed. 3) Then, we should
> first review python-django, which is already in work [1], but I
> believe it might be a good idea to wait for the fpc approval,
> before we actually approve and push it. 4) Finally, we should do
> all the other packages. In case some of the packagers are not
> responsive, we should have a proven packager standing by (I know
> two personally, so that shouldn't be a problem).
> 
Sounds like a good plan. I'll be travelling from Wednesday to the end
of the week, and I need to bring the python-django spec that's being
reviewed in sync with our latest Django package (and make some changes
already mentioned in the review ticket and in Bohuslav's email), but
I'll have time to do that later this week.

It'd be great to have this land (mea culpa: I'm the one who originally
picked 'Django' as the package name).



- -- 
Michel Alexandre Salim
Fedora Project Contributor: http://fedoraproject.org/

Email:  salimma at fedoraproject.org  | GPG key ID: A36A937A
Jabber: hircus at jabber.ccc.de       | IRC: hircus at irc.freenode.net

()  ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   - against proprietary attachments
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPS1fiAAoJEEr1VKujapN6Fp4H/j2a76cI+qq6EzkxQRj1nHkw
YCwwcLFpobAOI1cNgODZjvBwtKP9AVeRwqtonwP9KqSM3DsYY2uFzaO+kpY+iW69
hEec8Sq01xmomFrBR8RDWMohYfzii6yFjl/UCa1tM3AYDOGWXHdzc6omsnqFL7kR
aex8kxnMkQuuBrwbwX7yZaLwGSP5XJPov4tH+lTp/qtr0hshs1gBNVSK0Tdx+J93
85Q3GygPhe1DsfEfW7mfe0hugzTCSd0Oc6IPYStouM5ofAuRXxTa5qWEVBeH7mpW
BBfDXo2OAgDa8y4jdoGYmvjpeoDSCdj4KdxJzYavZykQndW83AhxnJb/uIVNSlw=
=pD9X
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----