A good name for development branch releases package

[Petr Menšík]

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, Ondřej Surý wrote:
> I quite like the nginx naming - stable and mainline.
>
> Ondřej
> --
> Ondřej Surý — 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 Menšík <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 Menšík
>> 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

-- 
Petr Menšík
Software Engineer
Red Hat, http://www.redhat.com/
email: pemensik at redhat.com
PGP: DFCF908DB7C87E8E529925BC4931CA5B6C9FC5CB