On Thursday, 22 September 2016 at 02:18, jason taylor wrote:
On Tue, 2016-09-20 at 07:26 -0400, jason taylor wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-09-20 at 08:34 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >
> > Let's keep the discussion on the epel-devel mailing list.
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 08:33:49PM -0400, jason taylor wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi Rich,
> > >
> > > I updated the spec to include:
> > >
> > > %if 0%{?el7}
> > > ExcludeArch: ppc64
> > > %endif
> > >
> > > The scratch build is here:
> > >
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=15711388
> > >
> > >
> > > Is the conditional something you would want to merge into the
> > > other
> > > branches or in this case maintain the epel spec seperately from
> > > the
> > > other branches?
> >
> > Please keep these changes in the epel 7 branch.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > I noticed that the latest upstream stable release is 2.48.4 and
> > > also
> > > that we build for very specific versions of unison.
> > >
> > > I was wondering what the history behind the RPM versioning that
> > > we
> > > have
> > > is and would it be possible/advisable to update to 2.48 while we
> > > are
> > > adding the epel7 branch?
> >
> > If you want to build the latest version in the epel 7 branch, then
> > go
> > ahead. I need to get round to updating the OCaml packages in
> > master
> > at some point when I have the time.
> >
> > Rich.
> >
>
> Sounds good, thanks!
>
> JT
With regard to package naming, how do packages with specific naming
like this get handled?
For instance in this case, when updating to the latest upstream unison-
2.48.4 this changes the package name to unison248.
Does this requires a new package request/review?
In Fedora, not anymore[1]. If EPEL doesn't have a specific guideline for
this, then not here, either.
Regards,
Dominik
[1]
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines#Package_Review_...
--
Fedora
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion
http://rpmfusion.org
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"