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

Re: parser vs ruby_parser gems



On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 07:05:42PM +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote:
> On 2020, മാർച്ച് 12 12:28:52 AM IST, Kiran Skunjumon <kiranskunjumon80@gmail.com> wrote:
> >their is two gem parser and ruby_parser.
> >In debian ruby_parser is packaged under ruby-parser instead of
> >ruby-ruby-parser.
> >parser is a dependency of unparser .
> >now i am stuck
> 
> I think we can use the github username (like we did earlier and a common practice for forks) to create a unique name for the new package. So we can package parser gem as ruby-whitequark-parser.

In this case it's not really a fork, it's a problem with our naming
convention.  We should stop making exceptions for gems whose names start
with "ruby[-_]*, and make ruby_foo become ruby-ruby-foo, not just
ruby-foo.

IMO it would be better to fix the name of existing package now instead
of postponing this. It would be

- rename ruby-parser to ruby-ruby-parser

- introduce parser as ruby-parser, adding Breaks: against versions of
  the packages that currently dependend on ruby-parser wanting the
  "ruby_parser" gem.

  $ reverse-depends ruby-parser
  Reverse-Depends
  * gitlab
  * obs-api
  * roodi
  * ruby-html2haml
  * ruby-ruby2ruby

  Those packages would need to be adjusted to depend on ruby-ruby-parser
  instead.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: