>>>>> "DČ" == Dan Čermák
<dan.cermak(a)cgc-instruments.com> writes:
DC> I tried to submit the package and during review I was made aware of
DČ> the package bear-devel, which is already in the fedora
DČ> repository.
Actually the source package name is just "bear", it merely produces
bear-devel, bear-engine and bear-factory. So the repository
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/bear already exists, and your
conflict is more than just an issue with confusion about bear-devel.
DČ> My question is: how should I address this issue? Renaming my
DČ> proposed package to Build-ear would be an option, but the binary
DČ> should still be called bear, to avoid confusion for users. Should I
DČ> ask the upstream author about their opinion concerning renaming?
Fortunately there is nothing in the distribution which provides
/usr/bin/bear, so there wouldn't be a problem there.
I could see perhaps persuading the bear maintainer to rename their
entire package to "bear-engine" and have "bear-engine-devel" and
"bear-engine-factory". Its binaries are "bend-image",
"image-cutter"
(which itself seems conflict-prone), some things with a "bf-" prefix,
and "running-bear". But any conversation about renaming is one you
should have with the bear package maintainer.
This is also not the first time this has come up. There is an (apparently
stalled?) movement to rename bear already, see: