postgresql-* package namespace (was: Re: Bug#683486: ITP: barman -- Backup and Recovery Manager for PostgreSQL)

2012-08-01 Thread Ansgar Burchardt
On 08/01/2012 11:18 AM, Roger Leigh wrote: On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 09:56:56AM +0200, Marco Nenciarini wrote: * Package name: barman postgresql-barman would make it a bit easier for people to find. Most of the other postgreql packages use the postgresql- namespace. The postgresql-*

Re: [Pkg-postgresql-public] postgresql-* package namespace (was: Re: Bug#683486: ITP: barman -- Backup and Recovery Manager for PostgreSQL)

2012-08-01 Thread Christoph Berg
I usually prefer packages to use the upstream name so they are easy to find (think other distributions). The various postgresql-* packages are mostly plugins (PL/something) which follow the example of postgresql-plperl-x.y (built from PG core). For real applications like barman, that's not

Re: [Pkg-postgresql-public] postgresql-* package namespace (was: Re: Bug#683486: ITP: barman -- Backup and Recovery Manager for PostgreSQL)

2012-08-01 Thread Martin Pitt
Hello Ansgar, Christoph, Christoph Berg [2012-08-01 21:12 +0200]: The various postgresql-* packages are mostly plugins (PL/something) Right, postgresql-X.Y-foo are server-side plugins which are specific to a major PostgreSQL server version. They need to be versioned just like PostgreSQL itself

Re: [Pkg-postgresql-public] postgresql-* package namespace (was: Re: Bug#683486: ITP: barman -- Backup and Recovery Manager for PostgreSQL)

2012-08-01 Thread Christoph Berg
Fwiw, I'm not saying packages must not use the postgresql namespace, I'd just leave it to the maintainer to decide. Martin Pitt mp...@debian.org schrieb: Hello Ansgar, Christoph, Christoph Berg [2012-08-01 21:12 +0200]: The various postgresql-* packages are mostly plugins (PL/something)