bind9- if were voting Ron Hall Senior System Administrator IT Services - NCS Core Infrastructure & Applications 514 398 3718 ________________________________ From: bind-users <bind-users-boun...@lists.isc.org> on behalf of Petr Menšík <pemen...@redhat.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 1, 2021 8:43:55 AM To: Ondřej Surý <ond...@isc.org> Cc: bind-users@lists.isc.org <bind-users@lists.isc.org> Subject: Re: A good name for development branch releases package
On 12/1/21 14:00, Ondřej Surý wrote: > What if you call it bind9-git or bind9-snapshot? The monthly releases are > development snapshots anyway... That would look like our custom tarballs made from main branch commits. I don't want to do arbitrary releases directly from git. Release notes prepared by ISC are very nice and I certainly want to have them included in the package updates. I think bind9-unstable is far better name, even it is not used directly on any ISC page. But at least is the opposite of stable releases mentioned explicitly. Relation to snapshot might be obvious to you as a developer, but I would not connect it with correct release myself. bind9-git sounds more like git-based zone databases, I don't think it makes it better or more obvious. I like candidates: - bind9-unstable - bind9-dev Any preference for any of them? > > Ondrej > -- > Ondřej Surý (He/Him) > ond...@isc.org > >> On 1. 12. 2021, at 13:07, Petr Menšík <pemen...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> Mainline seems strange term to me. I think it should be used also by ISC >> to identify that major version. When I download an archive, it uses >> Development status. Is mainline word ever used in any documentation for >> BIND9? I have never seen that in any article. I would like to use >> something users can recognize, not to learn by trying. >> >> I know Debian uses -dev suffix for header files, just like we use -devel >> on Fedora. bind-devel package already exists, it cannot be the new >> package name. Development word is a bit overused. bind9-dev might >> confuse user from Debian world, but is short enough and would use ISC >> terminology. >> >> When reading [1], I think bind9-odd might be also name of the package. >> But that name seems even more confusing. It would kind of discourage its >> use. >> >> 1. https://kb.isc.org/docs/aa-01540 >> >> On 11/30/21 19:19, Ondřej Surý wrote: >>> I quite like the nginx naming - stable and mainline. >>> >>> Ondřej >>> -- >>> Ondřej Surý — ISC (He/Him) >>> >>> My working hours and your working hours may be different. Please do not >>> feel obligated to reply outside your normal working hours. >>> >>>> On 30. 11. 2021, at 16:10, Petr Menšík <pemen...@redhat.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hello BIND users, >>>> >>>> I would like to add a new package of recent BIND9 development release to >>>> Fedora [1] distribution. Current "bind" package contains build of stable >>>> branch 9.16.x release. I think it would be good to keep stable releases >>>> available in Fedora. We still use just bind without 9 suffix. >>>> Theoretically another "bind9" could contain more recent releases. But I >>>> would like to reserve it for current bind package. >>>> >>>> One alternative would be using major version in package name. But I >>>> think one the latest stable release one the latest development releases >>>> would be always enough. bind package should be updated when 9.18.0 is >>>> released. I think development package should follow and upgrade to >>>> 9.19.0 as soon as possible. I would prefer single development package >>>> rolling with major development releases. >>>> >>>> COPR repository of ISC uses "bind9-dev" name. Would you recommend that >>>> name? I kind of like it. Slight disadvantage of this name is similarity >>>> with development headers subpackage, which uses common suffix "-devel" >>>> on Fedora. Development headers are still needed by bind-dyndb-ldap >>>> plugin. It uses bind-devel package now, similar alternative of >>>> development release would be "bind9-dev-devel". It does look like strange. >>>> >>>> Would you help me with a better proposal? What do you think about it? I >>>> don't expect development releases to ever reach Red Hat Enterprise Linux >>>> directly, but it might be build as Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux >>>> with community support. >>>> >>>> I don't want to support installation of both stable and development >>>> packages on single system. It would conflict and only one would have to >>>> be choosen. >>>> >>>> Is there any distribution offering already two releases at the same >>>> time? Would you have some idea, how should it be called? Do you like >>>> "bind9-dev" base name? >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Petr >>>> >>>> 1. https://getfedora.org >>>> >>>> -- Petr Menšík Software Engineer Red Hat, http://www.redhat.com/ email: pemen...@redhat.com PGP: DFCF908DB7C87E8E529925BC4931CA5B6C9FC5CB _______________________________________________ Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions. Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information. bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
_______________________________________________ Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions. Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information. bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
