#34 Package Renaming Guidelines

Created 7 years ago by jstanley

Let's firm these up.
< nim-nim> it would be great if some of the numerous people whose packages I've reviewed lately approved
18:56 < nim-nim> bug #481472
18:56 < nim-nim> bug #481476
18:56 < nim-nim> bug #481478
18:56 < buggbot> Bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=481472 medium, low, ---, notting @redhat.com, NEW, Renaming review: edrip-fonts ⇒ apanov-edrip-fonts
18:56 < buggbot> Bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=481476 medium, low, ---, notting @redhat.com, NEW, Renaming review: charis-fonts ⇒ sil-charis-fonts
18:56 < buggbot> Bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=481478 medium, low, ---, notting @redhat.com, NEW, Renaming review: andika-fonts ⇒ sil-andika-fonts
18:57 < nim-nim> or nirik, even, you're the one who insisted on review ;)
18:57 < nirik> nim-nim: notting is assigned all those?
18:58 < nim-nim> nirik: seems that's what happens when you create a bug against distro
18:58 < nirik> nim-nim: is that the right component? not Package Review?
18:58 < nim-nim> nirik: such as when cloning a renaming bug
18:58 * jds2001 would make it Pakcage Review
18:58 < nim-nim> nirik: I haven't the faintest idea what the right component is
18:59 < nim-nim> nirik: this is all under-specified
18:59 < nim-nim> nirik: you know I'd rather have given infra a rename list and let them deal with it in one go
18:59 < nirik> agreed. I guess we should make sure and overspecify it... can discuss at the next fesco meeting.

I created a draft a while back here:


But there are outstanding questions:

  • Should renaming reviews happen in bugzilla? or mailing list?
  • Should there be some exception or procedure for mass renaming, such as all the fonts that are currently being renamed.
  • Should approval come from provenpackagers or some other group? Or is maintainers enough?

What ever happened with this? I think we have guidelines on renames now.

Yes, it was decided that the guideline for renames is:

You must submit the package with it's new name and obsoletes/provides and get it reviewed as normal, once it's imported, the old named package is retired.

Perhaps we should codify this on the wiki.

ahh, that's why it's still open. I'm supposed to be making that happen/owning/cleaning up the pages on the wiki.

Thanks for reminding me :)

Replying to [comment:7 jstanley]:

Ping? This has yet to be documented as per ticket #261.

Yep, I'm on the hook for it this week. I should get to it tonight.

This writeup is completed. Let me know if something more is required. FESCo profusely apologizes for the delay in getting this decision documented.


Login to comment on this ticket.