[csw-maintainers] Packaging gems and package naming conventions

Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski maciej at opencsw.org
Mon Oct 18 18:38:23 CEST 2010

No dia 2 de Agosto de 2010 09:04, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> escreveu:
> Other topic: documentation. Having both rdoc and ri docs is quite
> large, most of the time the documentation is much larger in size
> and much, much larger in terms of files. I tend to split it off,
> but the standard _doc and -doc suffixes together with the gem
> prefix would leave only very little space for the actual gem
> name making identification difficult. I tend to increase the
> maximum length of package and catalog names for the sake of
> consistency.

On the package name length topic, opk recently came across
libpyglib-2.0-python.so.0, which yields CSWlibpyglib-2-0-python0, a 24
characters long pkgname.  Current restriction in checkpkg is 20
characters for both pkgname and catalogname.  Is it something we
intend to keep at all times, or is it OK to exceed this default in
cases such as this long soname?

More information about the maintainers mailing list