On Tuesday, 28 November 2017 at 20:16, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
[...]
> Microsoft Guidelines Support Library (your package) is the third
> hit. Why don't you just name it 'guideline-support-library'? I
> think it'll be clearer this way.
Seconded, excellent idea.
Regards,
Dominik
--
Fedora htt
On 11/28/2017 10:23 AM, Vitaly Zaitsev wrote:
I want to add a new package GSL (header-only C++ library:
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FMicrosoft%2FGSL&data=02%7C01%7Cprzemek.klosowski%40nist.gov%7C770bea95b2264237725d08d5367429ca%7C2ab5d82fd8fa4797a
Hi,
Many packaging ecosystems use vendor name in package name to disambiguate,
though they are usually prepended
If the vendor didn't want its name associated with the software it could
publish through neutral entities such as Apache, Eclipse, and so on. (never add
a vendor name not pro-eminen
I think that the vendor name should go at the beginning of the package name,
since suffixes are mostly used in Fedora to denote subpackages, like -data,
-docs, -devel, or modules, plugins, and such.
We have a couple of "google-*" font packages, so this usage of the vendor name
should be okay -
Hi, Vitaly.
On Tuesday, 28 November 2017 at 16:23, Vitaly Zaitsev wrote:
> I want to add a new package GSL (header-only C++ library:
> https://github.com/Microsoft/GSL) to repository, but another
> package with the same name (gsl) already exists in Fedora.
> I decided to rename my new package to g
On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 9:23 AM, Vitaly Zaitsev
wrote:
> Hello all.
>
> I want to add a new package GSL (header-only C++ library:
> https://github.com/Microsoft/GSL) to repository, but another package with
> the same name (gsl) already exists in Fedora. I decided to rename my new
> package to gsl
Hello all.
I want to add a new package GSL (header-only C++ library:
https://github.com/Microsoft/GSL) to repository, but another package with the
same name (gsl) already exists in Fedora. I decided to rename my new package to
gsl-microsoft. Is it okay to use Microsoft in package name or I need
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Sandro Mani wrote:
>> We have no ability to rename a package in koji. im not opposed to
>> reusing the name. Just need some way to ensure its very clear the old
>> and new are different. Likely need to add a conflicts with the old one.
>> hopefully versions allow f
We have no ability to rename a package in koji. im not opposed to
reusing the name. Just need some way to ensure its very clear the old
and new are different. Likely need to add a conflicts with the old one.
hopefully versions allow for upgrade okay, if not an epoch will need to
be added.
Dennis
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
El Thu, 19 Sep 2013 13:00:43 -0700
Toshio Kuratomi escribió:
> On Sep 19, 2013 12:53 PM, "Michael Schwendt"
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 13:51:28 +0200, Sandro Mani wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > On 13
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 13:51:28 +0200, Sandro Mani wrote:
>
> On 13.09.2013 11:48, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 09:54:49 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> >
> >> On 09/12/2013 10:40 PM, Sandro Mani wrote:
> >>
> >>> I just posted a review for avl (the Aerodynamic and flight-dynamic
>
> A few years ago, there would have been a helpful answer from the admins
> who would/wouldn't process such requests. I don't know whether it's
possible
> to not only rename a git repo but also the stuff within pkgdb and koji.
Cc'd Dennis to see if this can happen in koji. If it can't I woul
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 01:00:43PM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> Cc'd Dennis to see if this can happen in koji. If it can't I would not be
> opposed to the new package unretiring the name and having the pkgdb entry
> updated to the new package. The git history would have both the old
> package
On Sep 19, 2013 12:53 PM, "Michael Schwendt" wrote:
>
> On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 13:51:28 +0200, Sandro Mani wrote:
>
> >
> > On 13.09.2013 11:48, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > > On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 09:54:49 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 09/12/2013 10:40 PM, Sandro Mani wrote:
> > >>
> > >
On 13.09.2013 11:48, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 09:54:49 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
On 09/12/2013 10:40 PM, Sandro Mani wrote:
I just posted a review for avl (the Aerodynamic and flight-dynamic
analysis of rigid aircrafts package) [1], and the reviewer noticed that
it conf
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 09:54:49 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 09/12/2013 10:40 PM, Sandro Mani wrote:
>
> > I just posted a review for avl (the Aerodynamic and flight-dynamic
> > analysis of rigid aircrafts package) [1], and the reviewer noticed that
> > it conflicts with the retired avl package
On 13.09.2013 09:54, Florian Weimer wrote:
On 09/12/2013 10:40 PM, Sandro Mani wrote:
I just posted a review for avl (the Aerodynamic and flight-dynamic
analysis of rigid aircrafts package) [1], and the reviewer noticed that
it conflicts with the retired avl package (the AVL tree manipulation
Also, I guess it would be nice to have a package name that gives some
indication of what it is about (unless ofcourse the name itself is well
and widely known )
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 09/12/2013 10:40 PM, Sandro Mani wrote:
>
> I just posted a review for a
On 09/12/2013 10:40 PM, Sandro Mani wrote:
I just posted a review for avl (the Aerodynamic and flight-dynamic
analysis of rigid aircrafts package) [1], and the reviewer noticed that
it conflicts with the retired avl package (the AVL tree manipulation
library). How should one proceed in such situ
Hi,
I just posted a review for avl (the Aerodynamic and flight-dynamic
analysis of rigid aircrafts package) [1], and the reviewer noticed that
it conflicts with the retired avl package (the AVL tree manipulation
library). How should one proceed in such situations? Does the old
repository need
20 matches
Mail list logo
