[opensuse-buildservice] MaintainedIn -> DevelProject
Hi, we recently had a discussion about the MaintainedIn Feature which packages need that are actually developed in other projects. The most obvious usecase are packages in Factory that are developed in specialists projects and only on certain points of time synced into Factory. We were struggling about the name of the field in the package meta data. Suggestions were MaintainedIn, Origin and others. I like to propose here as a final name DevelProject. I think that reflects pretty much what it really is - the project where the package is actually developed. It avoids the foo_In _ problem as well as the term Maintained which misleads to the software maintenance. I assume everbody can ACK on this. Klaas -- Klaas Freitag Architect OPS/IPD SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - Nuernberg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 02:06:19PM +0200, Klaas Freitag wrote:
we recently had a discussion about the MaintainedIn Feature which packages need that are actually developed in other projects. The most obvious usecase are packages in Factory that are developed in specialists projects and only on certain points of time synced into Factory.
We were struggling about the name of the field in the package meta data. Suggestions were MaintainedIn, Origin and others.
I like to propose here as a final name DevelProject. I think that reflects pretty much what it really is - the project where the package is actually developed. It avoids the foo_In _ problem as well as the term Maintained which misleads to the software maintenance.
I assume everbody can ACK on this.
Klaas
How would it look like in an example? Like this? % osc meta pkg server:mail exim <package name="exim" project="server:mail"> <title>...</title> <description>...</description> <person role="maintainer" userid="poeml"/> </package> % osc meta pkg openSUSE:Factory exim <package name="exim" project="openSUSE:Factory" develproject="server:mail"> <title>...</title> <description>...</description> <person role="maintainer" userid="mlschroe"/> </package> I'm not convinced of develproject then, I'd rather call it origproject. Or rootproject. "devel" can mean different things also. But if you think the name is better, it won't matter so much, nothing that should stop us. And I have one concern: don't we need a reference to project as well as package? If we refer only to a project, the package name would need to be identical, no? Peter -- "WARNING: This bug is visible to non-employees. Please be respectful!" SUSE LINUX Products GmbH Research & Development
On Wednesday 23 April 2008, Klaas Freitag wrote:
I like to propose here as a final name DevelProject. I think that reflects pretty much what it really is - the project where the package is actually developed. It avoids the foo_In _ problem as well as the term Maintained which misleads to the software maintenance.
I think "DevelProject" has similar problems as a name as "MaintainedIn". It
refers to a practice how the tag is or could be used, not the technical
meaning, and it's a term with a pretty broad meaning. So I'm still in favor
of "Origin" or "OriginProject" as Peter suggested.
--
Cornelius Schumacher
participants (3)
-
Cornelius Schumacher
-
Klaas Freitag
-
Peter Poeml