Howdy!
I'm the sucker who volunteered to head up RPM Standards and Practices for Fedora Extras. I'd like to make a few things clear, before we get to the good stuff:
Check your egos at the door. If all you feel like doing is posturing, flaming, or mocking, this is NOT the list to do it in (I hear fedora-list is nice this time of year). If I think you're being more of a nuisance than an asset, I will warn you, then kick you off the list if you continue. I hope it doesn't come to that.
Keep an open mind, and back up your opinions. Disagree, but do so politely.
Be patient with me. I have a wife, a linux distribution, and a full time job that has nothing to do with Fedora Extras. I wasn't involved in the fedora.us period, so don't assume I know anything.
I am not interested in overhauling the existing RPM standards and practices. My task is to identify and document the existing standards and practices, highlight problems in the Fedora Extras packaging world, get them solved in a maintainable fashion.
Thanks in advance for your help and time,
~spot --- Tom "spot" Callaway: Red Hat Sales Engineer || GPG Fingerprint: 93054260 Fedora Extras Steering Committee Member (RPM Standards and Practices) Aurora Linux Project Leader: http://auroralinux.org Lemurs, llamas, and sparcs, oh my!
On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 02:04:06PM -0600, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote:
I'm the sucker who volunteered to head up RPM Standards and Practices for Fedora Extras. I'd like to make a few things clear, before we get to the good stuff:
Check your egos at the door. If all you feel like doing is posturing, flaming, or mocking, this is NOT the list to do it in (I hear fedora-list is nice this time of year). If I think you're being more of a nuisance than an asset, I will warn you, then kick you off the list if you continue. I hope it doesn't come to that.
Is this list really only for Fedora Extras, formerly fedora.us practices? Can't it be extended to a larger universe?
This was the main obstruction that created the hasm two years ago between fedora.us and the rest of the world. It would be nice to attack this issue w/o isolating again any parties.
What about Fedora Core itself? It doesn't make sense to have Fedora Core and Extras living side by side having different naming/versioning policies.
In fact I would go as far as to say that a sane set of packaging practices should not only be applicable to Fedora, but to RHEL as well (whether RHEL adopts it is another topic, but it should not be cut off from the beginning), and - why not - even outside the Red Hat rpm world.
A lot of issues discussed here already have good solutions and defacto standards in 3rd party repos for Fedora Core or other distributions.
I'd like to finally see a common effort on this and see the unneccessary barriers break to pieces. :)
On Sat, 2005-02-26 at 11:09 +0100, Axel Thimm wrote:
Is this list really only for Fedora Extras, formerly fedora.us practices? Can't it be extended to a larger universe?
My little piece of the universe is Fedora Extras. That doesn't mean other people can't use these standards for their pieces of the universe. It also doesn't mean that I'm ignoring everything else, feedback is welcome from everyone.
This was the main obstruction that created the hasm two years ago between fedora.us and the rest of the world. It would be nice to attack this issue w/o isolating again any parties.
My primary goal is to create a set of packaging standards and guidelines that will encourage more people to package for Fedora Extras. Inevitably, I won't be able to make everyone happy, but I am interested in making the majority happy enough to contribute.
What about Fedora Core itself? It doesn't make sense to have Fedora Core and Extras living side by side having different naming/versioning policies.
You're right. Which is why I'm glad we have some @redhat.com folks who have control over the Fedora Core packaging standards on this list. My hope is that if the Fedora Extras standards are accepted, used, and successful, it will transfer over to Fedora Core.
In fact I would go as far as to say that a sane set of packaging practices should not only be applicable to Fedora, but to RHEL as well (whether RHEL adopts it is another topic, but it should not be cut off from the beginning), and - why not - even outside the Red Hat rpm world.
I don't see any reason why anyone else shouldn't adopt these guidelines for packaging. We're definitely not saying "ONLY FEDORA EXTRAS MAY PACKAGE PACKAGES LIKE THIS".
A lot of issues discussed here already have good solutions and defacto standards in 3rd party repos for Fedora Core or other distributions.
Great! Please help me out, since I don't know of these other solutions and standards, and point me to them when I start reinventing the wheel.
I'd like to finally see a common effort on this and see the unneccessary barriers break to pieces. :)
I agree. Just keep in mind that I'm NOT out to get anyone, and I'm not trying to pee in anyone's swimming pool, I'm just trying to document simple standards that are easy to follow. :)
~spot --- Tom "spot" Callaway: Red Hat Sales Engineer || GPG Fingerprint: 93054260 Fedora Extras Steering Committee Member (RPM Standards and Practices) Aurora Linux Project Leader: http://auroralinux.org Lemurs, llamas, and sparcs, oh my!
<pragmatic>
This group is the ideal group to find the *right* solution, and to implement that solution in their domains. Coming up with a successful standard that is used by Fedora Extras, RPMForge, and every other major RPM repository in the world will apply pressure to Fedora Core and RHEL to follow suit.
</pragmatic>
_____________________ ____________________________________________ Greg DeKoenigsberg ] [ the future masters of technology will have Community Relations ] [ to be lighthearted and intelligent. the Red Hat ] [ machine easily masters the grim and the ] [ dumb. --mcluhan
On Sat, 26 Feb 2005, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote:
On Sat, 2005-02-26 at 11:09 +0100, Axel Thimm wrote:
Is this list really only for Fedora Extras, formerly fedora.us practices? Can't it be extended to a larger universe?
My little piece of the universe is Fedora Extras. That doesn't mean other people can't use these standards for their pieces of the universe. It also doesn't mean that I'm ignoring everything else, feedback is welcome from everyone.
This was the main obstruction that created the hasm two years ago between fedora.us and the rest of the world. It would be nice to attack this issue w/o isolating again any parties.
My primary goal is to create a set of packaging standards and guidelines that will encourage more people to package for Fedora Extras. Inevitably, I won't be able to make everyone happy, but I am interested in making the majority happy enough to contribute.
What about Fedora Core itself? It doesn't make sense to have Fedora Core and Extras living side by side having different naming/versioning policies.
You're right. Which is why I'm glad we have some @redhat.com folks who have control over the Fedora Core packaging standards on this list. My hope is that if the Fedora Extras standards are accepted, used, and successful, it will transfer over to Fedora Core.
In fact I would go as far as to say that a sane set of packaging practices should not only be applicable to Fedora, but to RHEL as well (whether RHEL adopts it is another topic, but it should not be cut off from the beginning), and - why not - even outside the Red Hat rpm world.
I don't see any reason why anyone else shouldn't adopt these guidelines for packaging. We're definitely not saying "ONLY FEDORA EXTRAS MAY PACKAGE PACKAGES LIKE THIS".
A lot of issues discussed here already have good solutions and defacto standards in 3rd party repos for Fedora Core or other distributions.
Great! Please help me out, since I don't know of these other solutions and standards, and point me to them when I start reinventing the wheel.
I'd like to finally see a common effort on this and see the unneccessary barriers break to pieces. :)
I agree. Just keep in mind that I'm NOT out to get anyone, and I'm not trying to pee in anyone's swimming pool, I'm just trying to document simple standards that are easy to follow. :)
~spot
Tom "spot" Callaway: Red Hat Sales Engineer || GPG Fingerprint: 93054260 Fedora Extras Steering Committee Member (RPM Standards and Practices) Aurora Linux Project Leader: http://auroralinux.org Lemurs, llamas, and sparcs, oh my!
-- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Axel Thimm -
Greg DeKoenigsberg -
Tom Callaway