[Kolab-devel] Kolab Naming (was Kolab-CF)

[Bernhard Reiter]

On Tuesday 20 January 2004 10:48, Thomas Lotterer wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2004, Stephan Buys wrote:
> > I would suggest:
> >
> > kolabd (kolab engine is also a nice name)
> > and
> > kolab-webadmin
> >
> > But is there a concept for a Kolab server version? At the moment we
> > are using OpenPKG-current so it is very hard to stay static with certain
> > versions? Also, I have no idea how Kolab versions differ from the kolab
> > rpms.

There is a need for a global version number
and a corresponding concept.

If people talk back about their Kolab,
they often do so with little detail.
So we needed to introduce a global version for all server components,
especially for the ones that actually work together
and habe been tested as a group.

Thomas explained at another place that OpenPKG will
become more stable in the future.
It might be okay to say have people use
a global Kolab-Server identifier and one for OpenPKG.
Like I'm using Kolab-Server-x.y.z on top of OpenPKG-n.m.q.

> OpenPKG is about packaging applications where Kolab is one of them.
> Development of both projects has too little interrelationship. A huge
> change in OpenPKG might have zero impact in Kolab and vice versa.

True, though occasionally it might make a difference.

> My conclusion here is I believe it is a good idea for Kolab to follow
> the OpenPKG version style but it is not a good idea for Kolab to follow
> the actual OpenPKG numbers.

I agree.

> Having that said and now knowing about kolab-cf my recommenation is to
> create at least three packages,
>
>  kolab-admin
>  kolab-glueie (intevation/erfrakon) requiring admin, conflicts with gluecf
>  kolab-gluecf (code fusion)         requiring admin, conflicts with glueie

Fine with me.

> Do not use multiple dashes, it
> might break various scripts that try to extract the package name out of
> filename. Only one package in OpenPKG has this bad habit and we better
> remove that exception but to create another one.

I'm I understanding this correctly, that you will remove those limitation
of being able to only use one dash? Otherwise I would suggest it. :)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2145 bytes
Desc: signature
URL: <http://lists.kolab.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20040123/7570e767/attachment.p7s>