[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       fedora-devel-list
Subject:    Re: Proposal to (formally/easily) allowing multiple versions of the same library installable
From:       William Cohen <wcohen () redhat ! com>
Date:       2015-02-13 18:56:57
Message-ID: 54DE48F9.9080801 () redhat ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On 02/13/2015 12:15 PM, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Hedayat Vatankhah wrote:
> 
> > 2. No reviews are required for new libfooX packages (as it is not
> > required right now when you update your libfoo package
> 
> I disagree with this point, reviews are important, arguably *more* important 
> in special cases like parallel-installable libraries.
> 
> > For -devel packages, two methods can be allowed:
> > 1. Simple: -devel packages conflict with each other, so while you can
> > have multiple versions of libfoo installed, you can have only a single
> > version of libfoo-devel installed
> > 2. Flexible: Provide the possibility of installing multiple -devel
> > versions, and a method to select the "default" one, like the
> > alternatives system.
> 
> +1 for option 2, option 1 is bad, there be dragons.

Option 1 is not viable.  On a machine that has multiple developers using it what \
happens when developer A needs devel rpm version X while developer B needs devel \
version Y? They have to take turns?  Also people doing development on the machine \
might not be system admins.  Asking a system admin to keep installing (and \
uninstalling) devel packages is not going to work.

-Will
> 
> 
> Though there are many opportunities for bikeshedding, the rest of your 
> proposal seems reasonable.
> 
> -- Rex
> 

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]