A good name for development branch releases package

Wed Dec 1 16:58:29 UTC 2021

I like bind-next too - shame we didn’t think of it when we created the repositories.

Ondrej
--
Ondřej Surý (He/Him)
ondrej at isc.org

> On 1. 12. 2021, at 17:56, Petr Menšík <pemensik at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> Well, why not, I like that. Only slight disadvantage to bind9-dev is it
> is never called similar way by ISC in any document. It is short,
> understandable, without conflicts. Describes well purpose and difference
> of that release also.
> 
> Thank you for this suggestion, an excellent candidate!
> 
> On 12/1/21 15:38, Petr Špaček wrote:
>> If you don't like nginx naming, then what about Linux kernel naming:
>> bind-next (similarly linux-next)?
>> 
>> Petr Špaček
>> 
>> 
>> On 01. 12. 21 13:07, pemensik at redhat.com (Petr Menšík) wrote:
>>> 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, Ond?ej Sur? wrote:
>>>> I quite like the nginx naming - stable and mainline.
>>>> 
>>>> Ond?ej
>>>> -- 
>>>> Ond?ej Sur? ? 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 Men??k <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 Men??k
>>>>> 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
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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