On Wed, 2005-02-23 at 23:09 +0100, Dag Wieers wrote:
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote:
Working as fast as I can... here is the first draft of the Naming Policy for Fedora Extras. Its not 100% complete yet, there are at least two sections missing, but it covers the bases for most new packagers.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageNamingGuidelines
Feedback is welcome, and encouraged.
Looks good, I would propose a standard SPEC file (in the SRPM) formatted as:
%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-%{repotag}.spec
If your working on a SPEC file and install several other versions, this would prevent SPEC files replacing others. And the origin is clear too.
Eek, please lets don't. That's what CVS and distro brances of packages are for.
For the package release, it may be useful to use < 1 release numbers to indicate a work in progress. (0.1, 0.2) We're doing the same in case we consider something a beta or rc product. (Especially if you're posting incremental test releases for other people to try).
Yep - this should be covered in the old fedora.us naming standard doc I mentioned but certainly should be explained in the standard.
- Panu -