qpid-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Darryl L. Pierce" <dpie...@redhat.com>
Subject Packaging and virtual provides
Date Mon, 21 Jul 2014 18:34:58 GMT
Currently the upstream packages in Fedora provide the following virtual

 qpid-cpp-client       -> qpid(client)
 qpid-cpp-client-devel -> qpid(client-devel)
 qpid-cpp-client-rdma  -> qpid(client-rdma)
 qpid-cpp-server       -> qpid(server)
 qpid-cpp-server-ssl   -> qpid(server-ssl)
 qpid-cpp-server-ha    -> qpid(server-ha)
 qpid-cpp-server-rdma  -> qpid(server-rdma)
 qpid-cpp-server-xml   -> qpid(server-xml)
 qpid-cpp-server-store -> qpid(server-store)

Justin pointed out that this doesn't provide enough detail and may cause
problems in future if and when a new client API, for example, is

So, I'm looking for some ideas on better virtual package names to be
provided. For example, the qpid-cpp-client API is qpid::messaging, so
this virtual package could be better named:


In the same way the qpid-cpp-server virtual package would be:




The other packages should have names that fall in line with those base
names; i.e., messaging-devel or broker-ha.

Ideas or thoughts?

Darryl L. Pierce, Sr. Software Engineer @ Red Hat, Inc.
Delivering value year after year.
Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors.

View raw message