Jaroslav Škarvada mailto:jskar...@redhat.com requested that i move the
discussion from:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1410366
about unifying the graphviz .spec file with upstream, to this list.
Perhaps the unification objective is not attainable because of different
requirements?
Upstream, we have single a distro-agnostic (RH and non-RH) graphviz.tar.gz
portable sources:
http://graphviz.org/Download_source.php
and then for RH, all distros, we have a single graphviz.src.rpm containing a
universal graphviz.spec.
http://graphviz.org/Download_linux_fedora.php
This works well for me, upstream, for building and testing across all
distributions, but perhaps the .spec file is less optimal when you separately
maintain versions for each distribution?
My preference would be to unify to a single .spec file, rather than to ~10
different ones, but maybe you will tell me that that isn't possible. In
which case i would probably keep a separate single .spec for upstream builds.
Minimally I'd like to reach some agreement on the set of sub-packages and their
names?
On the topic (from the bug report) of (e.g.) "graphviz-lang-python2" vs
"python2-graphviz"
would it be possible to discuss an exception?
My key issues are that the packages are a subpackages of graphviz, owned by
graphviz, supported by graphviz, from a single swig "gv.i" template for all
languages. I feel that reversing the naming loses the common connection of
these packages. Also I fear that the renaming may not go well since chances
are that someone else already has an xxx-graphviz.
All feedback considered.
John
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
