On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 10:15:54 +0100
"Richard W.M. Jones" <rjones(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 08:55:43AM +0200, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
> On 09/27/2011 07:46 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/unison213
> >
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/unison227
> >
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/unison
> >
> > Instead of introducing yet another variation, can we somehow
> > create a single 'unison' package which covers all of the protocol
> > variants?
>
> Why should I install all versions if I only want the recent one?
> Or the xxx one, for compatibility.
>
> Isn't there a general policy "split into many rpms, when possible"?
>
> Having a single executable would be great (like rsync), but that
> is an upstream issue.
They don't all need to be in separately named packages. It's not
beyond the realm of possibility for us to package up multiple versions
of the source into one unison package.
Well, typically we put one upstream source archive per package.
What does putting them all in one package gain us? Having to update all
of them if any of them need an update?
TBH I'd like to hear what FESCO have to say about this, because
AFAIK
there is no other package in the whole of Fedora which is packaged
this way.
The problem here is that upstream has no desire to keep a common
protocol, so you need the exact version on both ends. (If I recall
correctly). So, if you have say a debian box with version foo, you need
version foo on the fedora machine to talk to it. In the past this has
been done with multiple packages where 'yum install unison' gets you
the latest, and if you need an older version you can manually pick and
install that one.
So, not sure how better to solve this problem than with compatibility
packages.
kevin