Bug 491946 - Review Request: odfpy07 - compat package for odfpy
Summary: Review Request: odfpy07 - compat package for odfpy
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Toshio Ernie Kuratomi
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
Depends On:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2009-03-24 18:53 UTC by Matthew Daniels
Modified: 2009-10-14 20:04 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2009-10-08 01:21:59 UTC
Type: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Matthew Daniels 2009-03-24 18:53:54 UTC
Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~danielsmw/odfpy07/odfpy07.spec
SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~danielsmw/odfpy07/odfpy07-0.7-3.fc10.src.rpm
Description: A compat package for odfpy.  This package was created and submitted to fix a bug with mw-render, which requires odfpy 0.7.  I should also note that this is my first package, and I'd need a sponsor before I could actually get this in the repositories.

Comment 1 Michel Alexandre Salim 2009-03-25 14:40:45 UTC
The naming convention (I've not seen a guideline for this) appears to be to have compatibility packages be named compat-%{name} (or, more rarely, %{name}-compat). e.g. compat-db*, compat-gcc-*, compat-python24*.

How about compat-odfpy07?

Comment 2 Matthew Daniels 2009-03-25 14:53:30 UTC
The only guideline I was really going off of there was from the Naming Guidelines' example [1] about openssl and openssl096b.  I'd be happy to change it to compat-odfpy07 if that's the convention.  I'll upload a new SPEC/SRPM file as soon as I get the chance to make the edit.

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Multiple_packages_with_the_same_base_name

Comment 3 Toshio Ernie Kuratomi 2009-04-02 01:20:01 UTC
The naming is fine.  Since there's no compile step in python, the compat-$FOO vs $FOO$VER naming is a little mixed.  I think $FOO$VER is better unless we're putting the module in some sort of private directory.

Comment 4 Toshio Ernie Kuratomi 2009-04-02 02:32:14 UTC
So, before we do this, has anyone tried submitting a port to odfpy0.8 for python-mwlibs upstream?  That's really the right thing to do.  (I'll add a patch to the python-mwlibs bug now).

Comment 5 Toshio Ernie Kuratomi 2009-06-23 22:24:31 UTC
Do we want to close this since mwlibs has been ported to the new odfpy?

Comment 6 Matthew Daniels 2009-10-08 01:21:34 UTC
This package became irrelevant when Ian Weller updated mw-render anyway, so I'm closing the bug request.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.