[csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs berkeleydb3, berkeleydb3_dev, berkele(...)

[Philip Brown]

On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 3:58 AM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> Am 26.04.2011 um 02:36 schrieb Philip Brown:
>> On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 1:20 PM, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>  + berkeleydb3_doc-3.3.11,REV=2011.04.24_rev=p2-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>>>
>>> ..
>>>  + berkeleydb3_doc_stub-3.3.11,REV=2011.04.24_rev=p2-SunOS5.9-all-CSW.pkg.gz
>>
>> 1. is this stubbing, reaaaally neccessary for a "doc" package?
>
> This is the standard procedure for renaming.

This sucks. we're going waaay overboard on stub package creation here.


>
>> 2. you didnt do the "new" one correctly.
>>
>> CSWbdb3-doc 1 9078
>> NAME=berkeleydb3_doc - BerkeleyDB 3.3 documentation
>>
>> surely that should be
>>
>> CSWberkeleydb3-doc
>
> Umh, no. All other packages have the prefix CSWbdb3-*

but if you're going through all this trouble to "rename" everything,
then shouldnt you fix the naming here also? We're supposed to have
congruence between catalog name and PKG name now arent we?


> This having said, the idea was to just fix the bug I wrote about.


if you're "just fixing the bug", then "just fix the bug".

If you're renaming and stubbing, then you're not "just fixing the bug".

consistency please.