[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

confirming some package names before creating them (was Re: [Pkg-puppet-devel] in need of a little help for packaing puppet development kit with all dependencies)



Hello Ruby Team,

[redirecting the discussion only to the ruby team since it has more to
do with this team's policies since I intend to manage as much as
possible ruby packages within this team]

I was intending to send an email to the team specifically for these
questions, so here goes:

On 2020-02-13 6:52 p.m., Georg Faerber wrote:
>> Some more might actually also be kind of easy but I'll have to
>> confirm/discuss the package names with the ruby team wrt the presence
>> of a shipped cli script/"binary".
> What's the question here, specifically? "What name should be used, if a
> Ruby lib ships a binary"?

most of my questions smell like this, yes. so they should be pretty easy
to clear up :)

I do have one that might be a bit more spikey about licensing. I'll send
this one in another email.

> If so, I'm not sure there is a general team
> policy on this. I guess the current practice looks something like "if
> the lib is mainly a lib, ruby-$foo is used, if it's more an application,
> it should be $foo".

^ right, that's what I remember reading on the Ruby Team's wiki page.

For the following, here's what I'm intending to choose as a package name
(ITPs still need to ben sent). I think these are more probably OK to be
named without the "ruby-" prefix:

 * jgrep
   -> this one seems rather clear to me since the main script can be
used independantly on the CLI to process any JSON information
 * facterdb
   -> this one is usually mainly used as a library but it does ship a
main script that can be used for printing a set of information from the
library
 * metadata-json-lint
   -> same situation as facterdb: it's mainly used as a library but it
does ship a script for running checks on a file independently on the CLI

This one is a bit more tricky:

 * ruby-pathspec
   -> it's mainly used as a lib but it does ship a script for testing
values on the CLI.
   * I've already sent an ITP for "ruby-pathspec" before I realized it
was shipping a script. So if I need to change the name, I'll just need
to know how I can deal with the ITP bug report to avoid issues.. send a
bts command to re-title, or is there another manipulation necessary?
   * The script that's shipped is named "pathspec-rb" which differs from
the gem name "pathspec". Should the package take on the name of that
script, "pathspec-rb", even though the library itself is called
"pathspec"? it seems a bit confusing
   * "pathspec" is pretty generic and refers to a concept in the git
codebase, so I would possibly tend to keep "ruby-pathspec" as the
package name. what do others think about this?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: