On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 12:45 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Michel Alexandre Salim <salimma(a)fedoraproject.org> writes:
> I'm currently reviewing pgRouting:
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652533
> the packager is currently using "postgresql-pgrouting" as the name, which
> is alright but a bit long. There does not seem to be a policy for naming
> DB add-ons yet (though I see a couple of postgresql-* packages).
> Would the same policy applied as to, say, the Python add-ons? e.g.
> "if the name starts with [pP]y then you don't need the python-
prefix".
> In this case, "pg" would clearly indicate that it's to be used with
> PostgreSQL.
Please do NOT give it a name starting with "postgresql-". That would
cause great confusion because people couldn't tell which RPMs originate
with postgresql itself and which originate from other packages.
As Michel said there are many packages in the repo starts with
postgresql-*, all of them are not a part of the actual postgresql. Eg:
postgresql-pgpool
We need to correct them as well, if possible :)
I don't see anything much wrong with "pgrouting" as the package name.
regards, tom lane
--
packaging mailing list
packaging(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
Thanks
Viji