For consistency, I'd prefer a uniform prefix so we don't have to maintain a list of exceptions.... and then have a way to export this easily to downstream tooling. Bikeshed moment: pkg- rpm- src- Pat On Tue, 2021-08-31 at 10:11 -0400, Ken Dreyer wrote: > This seems extreme for one package named "tree", when Pagure's web UI > has a similar bug > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__pagure.io_pagure_issue_4409&d=DwIGaQ&c=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA&r=OAMtP0DWou0nlXG7Kmxo2enjXJfwb1DXS9fwcaESuTE&m=jxb5hY5N0YWkRVsALdZ_isDqpFn4IpCPDg2dBn7dnM8&s=XS-Uy9EAz1IcFbkvayuOR9ancCHef6mQUEyblHgpP0M&e= > > > What if we just set the policy to "If your package is on the list of > names at > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.gitlab.com_ee_user_reserved-5Fnames.html&d=DwIGaQ&c=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA&r=OAMtP0DWou0nlXG7Kmxo2enjXJfwb1DXS9fwcaESuTE&m=jxb5hY5N0YWkRVsALdZ_isDqpFn4IpCPDg2dBn7dnM8&s=FWkjCkYYFbxPwJ9hc6d-OXwDbQOlu6sXHNXMAqyc21A&e= > , add a > "-pkg" suffix" ? > > Does the GitLab support contract cover this sort of thing? > > - Ken > > On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 7:35 AM Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat.com> > wrote: > > > > Gitlab cannot support an undocumented set of Git repository names. > > Currently, this list appears to contain at least these names: > > > > badges > > blame > > blob > > builds > > commits > > create > > create_dir > > edit > > files > > find_file > > new > > preview > > raw > > refs > > tree > > update > > wikis > > > > There may be additional constraints for: > > > > environments > > gitlab-lfs > > info > > > > We have at least one collision today, tree. > > > > One way to avoid these problems is to prefix all package names with > > “pkg-”. This way, future collisions become extremely unlikely, at > > the > > cost of a one-time large rename. > > > > The alternative would be to main an exception mechanism for > > colliding > > package names such as “tree”. This has been the current approach, > > but > > as far as I can tell, it is not working. > > > > Implementing this change depends on the completion of the package > > removal process because it does not appear worthwhile to rename > > packages > > which no longer exist in the distribution. > > > > Thanks, > > Florian > > > > _______________________________________________ > > CentOS-devel mailing list > > CentOS-devel at centos.org > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.centos.org_mailman_listinfo_centos-2Ddevel&d=DwIGaQ&c=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA&r=OAMtP0DWou0nlXG7Kmxo2enjXJfwb1DXS9fwcaESuTE&m=jxb5hY5N0YWkRVsALdZ_isDqpFn4IpCPDg2dBn7dnM8&s=cCAk-oWLnu6fUeGQIMntbpIBU_I_B3Qj9y9D4OlExZU&e= > > > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-devel mailing list > CentOS-devel at centos.org > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.centos.org_mailman_listinfo_centos-2Ddevel&d=DwIGaQ&c=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA&r=OAMtP0DWou0nlXG7Kmxo2enjXJfwb1DXS9fwcaESuTE&m=jxb5hY5N0YWkRVsALdZ_isDqpFn4IpCPDg2dBn7dnM8&s=cCAk-oWLnu6fUeGQIMntbpIBU_I_B3Qj9y9D4OlExZU&e= >