Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-ruby (83 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-ruby] Revised gem packaging
On 05.11.2012 14:31, Adam Spiers wrote:


Is it just a historical thing which happened before your revamp
introduced the automatic provides/requires?

OK, so I now know what the automatic provides/requires really look
like, but I still haven't heard an answer why the naming scheme 'Name:
rubygem-foo-1_1' was ever used, when Requires/Provides of symbols
achieved the same thing.

I already gave it to you: it was used to implement the ~> operator
without touching rpm.


And the following is not 100% clear to me either:

Stephan Kulow (coolo@xxxxxxx) wrote:
So the policy we live is this: we package <gem> as rubygem-<gem>
and only add a version suffix only if something requires an old
version of <gem> (and then only to the old version) or if
<gem> is <rails> - for historical reasons :)

Add a version suffix to what - the Name: field of the old version of
the gem being required? If so, why not just use symbols?

No, the suffix is only there to avoid clashes between two .rpm files.
You can't have rubygem-<gem> twice in the build service. So once of them
needs to have rubygem-<gem>-<version_part> and the (new) policy is that
this one is the old one.


It's not enough for this wiki page to document the current (latest)
versioning schemes - the old versioning schemes existing in several
repositories, and will continue to cause confusion for people like me
unless we document a summary of the history behind the changes. I
don't want other people to have to waste as much time on this as I
have.
Hmm, isn't having the history next to the state confusing too?

Greetings, Stephan


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-ruby+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-ruby+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >
List Navigation