There should be a single, documented way for naming lua and compat-lua packages.
Proposed naming conventions:
upstream lua project: lpeg fedora Lua 5.3: lua-lpeg fedora Lua 5.1 (compat): compat-lua-lpeg
For details and discussion, see https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/DCNFJFXRIL3YAWLEPXGNHBVEQ5SMX2SZ/
cc @asn
Metadata Update from @james: - Issue tagged with: meeting
Using compat-lua-anything is really not the best idea. What does "compat" mean? Obviously compatible with something, but that's not how we generally name things in Fedora.
compat-lua-anything
So we should have lua for the currently supported version, and something like lua5.1 for an old version we're keeping around. This would naturally suggest lua5.1-lpeg for the version of that library compatible with the old version.
lua
lua5.1
lua5.1-lpeg
I'm fine with any convention as long as it's documented and universally used.
For example, Arch uses:
lua-lpeg lua51-lpeg lua52-lpeg
In Fedora the period in the version should not be dropped. Unless lua version 51 has been released, the package should be named with a prefix of lua5.1. Yes, there are packages that get this wrong.
Yes, there are packages that get this wrong.
For example Python packages, where we keep the naming scheme for consistency (I'm not particularly happy about this either, but...).
We talked about this at this weeks meeting (https://meetbot-raw.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2019-04-11/fpc.2019-04-11-16.00.txt):
Metadata Update from @tibbs: - Issue assigned to tibbs
Metadata Update from @tibbs: - Issue untagged with: meeting - Issue tagged with: writeup
Commit 154fba7 relates to this ticket
Metadata Update from @tibbs: - Issue untagged with: writeup - Issue tagged with: announce
Metadata Update from @tibbs: - Issue close_status updated to: accepted - Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)
Login to comment on this ticket.