[csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs rdesktop

[Peter FELECAN]

Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> writes:

> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 12:25 AM, Peter FELECAN <pfelecan at opencsw.org> wrote:
>>
>>> shouldnt you changed the rev to 1.6.0patched or something like that then?
>>
>> The change in the REV stanza is not enough?
>
> well, making it REV=2001.01.17.patched  or something would be fine too.
> I think its important to let our users know, "this is not just
> rdesktop 1.6.0 source".
>
> Naming it rdesktop-1.6.0,REV=2011.01.17 as it currently stands,
> implies that it is just pure 1.6.0
> Mentioning it in the README is nice, but I think we need to be more
> accurate in the naming.
> It is after all, "version naming". We are misrepresenting "this is
> rdesktop version 1.6.0".
>
> It would be nice to have some kind of opencsw standard, "this is
> patched" naming addon.
> (for feature patch, not just "make it compile on solaris/relocate to /opt/csw")
>
> This is one reason I hate the openssh people:
> The nice simple standard for us, would be
>
> software-#.#.#p, p=="patched".

Almost every package among the 110 that I maintain have patches. This is
nominal for every packaging project, viz. Debian. This is why I think
that we should provide source packages with the patches that we
apply. Also, this is why I think that it's not required to add a special
identifier to our packages when a patch is applied.
-- 
Peter