Re: Question regarding split of packages

[Paul Howarth <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 01/11/2012 09:20 AM, Matthias Runge wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 10/01/12 12:10, Simone Caronni wrote:
> > Hello,
> I just stumbled upon this:
>
> the plan is to separate the bacula-docs subpackage from bacula package
> and create a new package bacula-docs.
> (review request at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771941 )
>
> My question is, is the split possible in existing trees, e.g in F16?
> This step doesn't introduce new features, so it shouldn't harm
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Stable_release_updates_vision
>
> There's just the situation that bacula-docs is provided from earlier
> bacula-package and also from bacula-docs. Would those two clash in
> stable branches?

Shouldn't be a problem as longs as the NEVRs are different. Some perl 
modules are provided by the main perl package and also independently, 
resulting in two versions of the same package being available and that 
doesn't seem to be a problem.

Paul.
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging