If you don't like nginx naming, then what about Linux kernel naming:
bind-next (similarly linux-next)?
Petr Špaček
On 01. 12. 21 13:07, pemensik at redhat.com (Petr Menšík) wrote:
Mainline seems strange term to me. I think it should be used also by ISC
to identify that major version. When I download an archive, it uses
Development status. Is mainline word ever used in any documentation for
BIND9? I have never seen that in any article. I would like to use
something users can recognize, not to learn by trying.
I know Debian uses -dev suffix for header files, just like we use -devel
on Fedora. bind-devel package already exists, it cannot be the new
package name. Development word is a bit overused. bind9-dev might
confuse user from Debian world, but is short enough and would use ISC
terminology.
When reading [1], I think bind9-odd might be also name of the package.
But that name seems even more confusing. It would kind of discourage its
use.
1. https://kb.isc.org/docs/aa-01540
On 11/30/21 19:19, Ond?ej Sur? wrote:
I quite like the nginx naming - stable and mainline.
Ond?ej
--
Ond?ej Sur? ? ISC (He/Him)
My working hours and your working hours may be different. Please do not feel
obligated to reply outside your normal working hours.
On 30. 11. 2021, at 16:10, Petr Men??k <pemensik at redhat.com> wrote:
?Hello BIND users,
I would like to add a new package of recent BIND9 development release to
Fedora [1] distribution. Current "bind" package contains build of stable
branch 9.16.x release. I think it would be good to keep stable releases
available in Fedora. We still use just bind without 9 suffix.
Theoretically another "bind9" could contain more recent releases. But I
would like to reserve it for current bind package.
One alternative would be using major version in package name. But I
think one the latest stable release one the latest development releases
would be always enough. bind package should be updated when 9.18.0 is
released. I think development package should follow and upgrade to
9.19.0 as soon as possible. I would prefer single development package
rolling with major development releases.
COPR repository of ISC uses "bind9-dev" name. Would you recommend that
name? I kind of like it. Slight disadvantage of this name is similarity
with development headers subpackage, which uses common suffix "-devel"
on Fedora. Development headers are still needed by bind-dyndb-ldap
plugin. It uses bind-devel package now, similar alternative of
development release would be "bind9-dev-devel". It does look like strange.
Would you help me with a better proposal? What do you think about it? I
don't expect development releases to ever reach Red Hat Enterprise Linux
directly, but it might be build as Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux
with community support.
I don't want to support installation of both stable and development
packages on single system. It would conflict and only one would have to
be choosen.
Is there any distribution offering already two releases at the same
time? Would you have some idea, how should it be called? Do you like
"bind9-dev" base name?
Regards,
Petr
1. https://getfedora.org
--
Petr Men??k
Software Engineer
Red Hat, http://www.redhat.com/
email: pemensik at redhat.com
PGP: DFCF908DB7C87E8E529925BC4931CA5B6C9FC5CB
_______________________________________________
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe
from this list
ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions.
Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information.
bind-users mailing list
bind-users at lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
_______________________________________________
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe
from this list
ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions.
Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information.
bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
