[csw-maintainers] Packaging gems and package naming conventions

Philip Brown phil at bolthole.com
Mon Oct 18 18:46:33 CEST 2010

On 10/18/10, Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski <maciej at opencsw.org> wrote:
> 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?a

Reguarding "at all times"... either something is a limit, or it isnt.
We've gone over this before, multiple times, since the start of CSW.
There needs to be "a limit", it's insane for it to be unlimited.
Whatever we pick as a limit, some things are going to hit it, and will
need to get tweaked.
It doesnt make sense to go upping the limit every time something hits it.
20 chars is the limit for multiple reasons. Some of them include:
- preserving meaningful display on pkginfo
- preserving meaningful display on terminal output
- preserving meaningful display on weekly summaries.

Remember, our version string is now extra long too, so software name
and package name need to be kept short to compensate for that.

More information about the maintainers mailing list