Re: [PATCH] Rename git-core rpm to just git and rename the meta-pacakge to git-all.

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Kristian Høgsberg <krh@redhat.com> writes:

> ---
>
> So here's change to fix my favorite annoyance with the git rpm
> packaging: don't pull in tla when I say yum install git!  The decision
> to make 'git' a metapackage is to say the least unconventional and
> continues to surprise people (here's today discussion:
> http://marc.info/?t=120309228600004&r=1&w=2).
>
> I know it's late and most people who use the git rpms are used to installing
> git-core by now, but myself and most of my Red Hat co-workers (who should
> know a thing or two about rpm packaging) have been fooled by the 'git'
> rpm that pulls in everything.  There's really no precendence for this, quite
> the opposite: you wouldn't expect yum install gcc to pull in fortran, right?
>
> The patch below only affects people who know that 'git' is a metapackage
> and actually use that to pull in everything (but who does?).  The patch
> renames the 'git-core' rpm to just 'git', but adds a 'Provides: git-core'
> there so people who have trained themselves to say yum install git-core
> wont get burned.

Why all of these good information is below the three-dash lines
and without Sign-off?

The spec file I ship in git.git was written by somebody else for
Linus a long time ago, augmented with patches from others over
time, and I freely admit that I am RPM challenged.  I do not
exactly know what I have been shipping, and I do not personally
manage an RPM based system.  Having no way of testing any
changes myself makes me first go hide whenever I see a patch to
the spec file and then re-approach the patch slowly, prodding
with ten-foot pole.  The only thing that is saving the world
from disaster is that Distro people tend to have and do use
their own spec file, not mine ;-)

So I am more than Ok with a patch like this from somebody whose
RPM skills and common sense I can trust.

I have to wonder where the git-p4 obsoletion went, though.