Re: Defining some official package naming standards

[Max Bowsher <maxb1 at ukf dot net>]

Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Aug 12 23:13, Max Bowsher wrote:
> > The recent thread about remake suggests it would be a good idea to 
> > define some actual official package naming rules: exactly what things 
> > are considered valid for the name, version, and release fields in a package.
> >
> > I propose:
> >
> > A package NVR identifier is name-version-release - three fields 
> > separated by '-' characters.
> >
> > The release field MUST NOT contain a '-' character.
> >
> > The version field MUST begin with a digit. Well-behaved parsers should 
> > allow it to contain '-' characters, but package creators should try to 
> > avoid this because it can lead to NVRs that look confusing.
> >
> > The name field may contain '-' characters, EXCEPT that it MUST NOT 
> > contain a '-' character immediately followed by a digit.
>
> Weird, but I always thought that the above is already state of the art.

The above is a set of rules distilled from current practice, but I don't 
think we've actually defined and documented this before.

Max.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature