Jedy:

> libsexy has already been ARC'd so I guess the package name has already
> been registered.

Oh, I see, this was ARC'ed along with Compiz and the package names are
SUNWlibsexy and SUNWsexy-python.

   http://sac.sfbay/LSARC/2008/115/proposal.txt

> Putting many libaries into one packages will redcuce the number of spec
> files  but will increase the build time and the difficaulty of updating
> a single library. Leaving the library alone will introduce complicated
> dependency and we have to maintain more spec files. ???Do we have any
> policy to handle this situation?

The advantage of lumping multiple modules into a single package is that
it can help to avoid needing to go through the EOL/EOF process when
something is removed.

For example, we currently have libgweather in SUNWgnome-panel.  If,
in the future, libgweather were to go away, then we can remove it
without affecting any package names.

Since package names are normally "Uncommitted", if we have libgweather
in its own separate package, then you need to go through the EOF process
when it is removed.

So, it is generally not a good idea to put something into a separate
library if you know it is likely it will go away.  Highly volatile or
private libraries are typically the best candidates for libraries to
be bundled into a multi-module package.

On the other hand, libraries that are commonly used outside of the GNOME
stack (e.g. dependencies such as GnuTLS or libexif) make better sense to
have in separate packages.

So, Jedy, we have two choices:

1. Submit an ARC FastTrack to specify that you plan to integrate these
    interfaces into a different package than was previously specified
    in the Compiz case.  Then we could bundle it into SUNWgnome-base-libs
    or SUNWgnome-panel.

2. Add the new package specified in the Compiz ARC case with the
    understanding that you (or someone) will need to go through the
    ARC EOL/EOF process when we want to remove the package.

Really #1 is less work since you have to give 1 years prior
notification when you EOL/EOF.  Avoiding the hassles of approach #2
was the motivation for multi-module packages.

Brian


Reply via email to