https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2293272
--- Comment #10 from Fabio Valentini <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Siddhesh Poyarekar from comment #6) > (In reply to Fabio Valentini from comment #4) > > The "compat-*" naming scheme has been obsolete for years. No new packages > > should use it. > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Naming/#multiple > > > > In this case, the package name should probably be "gcc13". > > We want to package a gcc that runs behind the bleeding edge a bit, so gcc13 > where the default compiler is gcc14, gcc14, when the default compiler > rebases to gcc15, and so on. For that reason, we want to avoid having the > version number in the name and call it something descriptive without a > version number. It looks like the naming convention allows the latter[1], > so maybe gcc-prevrel? If those packages aren't going to stick around for long periods of time, what keeps you from using the "normal" scheme for compat package names? There is almost no overhead to creating new packages for gcc13, gcc14, etc. (compat packages like those technically don't even need to go through package review). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2293272 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202293272%23c10 -- _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
