https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1580108
Packager introduces change in package name without reason and against FPG rules.
Current situation:
gegl04-devel-0:0.4.4-1.fc29.i686 gegl04-devel-0:0.4.4-1.fc29.x86_64 gegl04-devel-docs-0:0.4.4-1.fc29.x86_64 gegl04-tools-0:0.4.4-1.fc29.x86_64 gimp-2:2.10.4-1.fc29.x86_64 gimp-gap-0:2.7.0-19.GITb17f908.fc29.x86_64 gimp-libs-2:2.10.4-1.fc29.i686 gimp-libs-2:2.10.4-1.fc29.x86_64 gnome-photos-0:3.29.3-1.fc29.x86_64 libmypaint-0:1.3.0-8.fc29.i686 libmypaint-0:1.3.0-8.fc29.x86_64 ufraw-gimp-0:0.22-13.fc29.x86_64
gegl-devel-0:0.2.0-39.fc29.i686 gegl-devel-0:0.2.0-39.fc29.x86_64 gegl-operations-workshop-0:0.2.0-39.fc29.x86_64
As it is possible to see packager introduces gegl package name on SONAME change when none of the the other packages requires gegl 0.2.x.
None of the rules described on https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Naming?rd=Packaging:NamingGuidelines allows do this.
Why is this filled for FPC? Packaging committee takes care only about guidelines. Please open a bug against component on bugzilla.
Please, close this, due in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1580108 has been described reasons for this state in f28 and gegl package will be removed from f29, so only gegl04 will be available.
So it is nothiong wrong with change package name only because SONAME has been changed? Where I can find anything about this in FPG? Is it any plan to introduce Debian like packages naming convention in Fedora?
PS. What will take care of remove gegl from set installed packages?
Please, resolve this elsewhere.
Metadata Update from @churchyard: - Issue close_status updated to: nothingtodo - Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)
Login to comment on this ticket.