The package is in cauldron, so we expect it to be in Mga2 stable

Keywords: (none) => Backport
CC: (none) => marja11
Hardware: i586 => All
Summary: David Batch Processor => dbp, David's Batch Processor gimp plugin
Source RPM: (none) => dbp
Severity: normal => enhancement

I think this package should be renamed to gimp-plugin-dbp, so it will be easier to find in rpmdrake.

CC: (none) => napcok

(In reply to comment #2)
> I think this package should be renamed to gimp-plugin-dbp, so it will be easier
> to find in rpmdrake.

@ matteo

Sorry, I get lost in all the policies for packagers and I can't find the one with rules about naming packages. 

Anyway, thanks to Daniel I now found the package exists in Mdv 2010.x, and is called gimp-dbp there. So it is valid to import it in Mga1 and it can go in 1/updates instead of 1/backports.

Keywords: Backport => (none)
Assignee: bugsquad => pasotti.matteo
Summary: dbp, David's Batch Processor gimp plugin => dbp, or gimp-dbp or gimp-plugin-dbp, David's Batch Processor gimp plugin
Source RPM: dbp => dbp or gimp-dbp or gimp-plugin-dbp
Whiteboard: (none) => Mdv, cauldron

I cannot find other packages named this way (I mean gimp-plugin-xyz).
At the moment dbp plugin can be installed using dbp-gimp because I was following the (not-written) naming convention used by packages like ufraw-gimp or xsane-gimp.

I think we have to write down some line of text into the wiki about naming conventions of packages containing gimp plugins or gimp scripts. If something already exists, can You point me into the right direction, please?
Regards

CC: (none) => pasotti.matteo

(In reply to comment #4)
> I cannot find other packages named this way (I mean gimp-plugin-xyz).
> At the moment dbp plugin can be installed using dbp-gimp because I was
> following the (not-written) naming convention used by packages like ufraw-gimp
> or xsane-gimp.
> 
> I think we have to write down some line of text into the wiki about naming
> conventions of packages containing gimp plugins or gimp scripts. If something
> already exists, can You point me into the right direction, please?
> Regards

@ Florian
@ Kamil

If this already exists, where is it?

@ Florian

If it doesn't exist, do you have time to see it that those conventions do get written down?

CC: (none) => doktor5000, n54

@ shlomif

there is a question here about naming conventions for gimp plugins, but I forgot to cc you, sorry

CC: (none) => shlomif

There is no policy for naming the Gimp plugins.

"Name should be the upstream name of the software project, always lowercase." https://wiki.mageia.org/en/RPM_Spec_file_policy

"Package Naming
    Name should be the upstream name of the software project, always lowercase.
    When the package name is different to the project name, you should define and use %{upstream_name} macro to refer to the original project name within the spec
    Dash '-' must be used as the delimiter for name parts.
    Do NOT use an underscore '_', a plus '+', or a period '.' as a delimiter.
    The spec file should be named using the %{name}.spec scheme, i.e. the name of the package should be used as the name for the spec "
https://wiki.mageia.org/en/Packaging_guidelines

I have checked the naming for plugins for GIMP in distros, it's usually:
NAME-gimp[2]
gimp[2]-plugin-NAME
gimp[2]-NAME
gimp[2]-NAME-plugin
NAME

Well, actually the naming convention should have been there and followed when all those packages were imported to Mageia. I don't know if now renaming all those plugins, to follow some convention like gimp-plugin-NAME is not a bit overkill.
If we want to do this, it should be discussed first on -dev mailing list.

I've no strong opinion about this as i rarely use gimp, and i don't need any plugins then. Another option would be a wiki page which lists all the plugins for gimp and their purpose.

dbp package was replaced by dbp-gimp, to allow its listing while using rpmdrake.

I've started a wiki page about this topic https://wiki.mageia.org/en/Gimp_plugins

Moreover gimp-plugin-registry package was imported into cauldron Dec 13, 2011 by shlomif.
This package conflicts with dbp-gimp (old dbp) and layerfx-gimp, both previously imported (dbp imported Oct 24, 2011 and layerfx-gimp imported Dec 09, 2011) becuase provides the same files.
I think this package (gimp-plugin-registry) should be removed for these reasons:
- contains a lot of plugins each one with its own version, if we have to upgrade a single plugin to a newer version, we have to rebuild the entire package with all the others plugins (no granularity)
- it was a mib package, no others rpm distro used it. It's used by debian and ubuntu (obviously this is not a reason to drop it neither to maintain it).

(In reply to comment #9)
> dbp package was replaced by dbp-gimp, to allow its listing while using
> rpmdrake.
> 
> I've started a wiki page about this topic
> https://wiki.mageia.org/en/Gimp_plugins
> 
> Moreover gimp-plugin-registry package was imported into cauldron Dec 13, 2011
> by shlomif.
> This package conflicts with dbp-gimp (old dbp) and layerfx-gimp, both
> previously imported (dbp imported Oct 24, 2011 and layerfx-gimp imported Dec
> 09, 2011) becuase provides the same files.
> I think this package (gimp-plugin-registry) should be removed for these
> reasons:
> - contains a lot of plugins each one with its own version, if we have to
> upgrade a single plugin to a newer version, we have to rebuild the entire
> package with all the others plugins (no granularity)
> - it was a mib package, no others rpm distro used it. It's used by debian and
> ubuntu (obviously this is not a reason to drop it neither to maintain it).

@ Shlomi

WDYT?

I was skeptical about gimp-plugin-registry as well in this regard, so I'm fine with removing it and splitting it up into individual packages.

Regards,

-- Shlomi Fish

(In reply to comment #11)
> I was skeptical about gimp-plugin-registry as well in this regard, so I'm fine
> with removing it and splitting it up into individual packages.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> -- Shlomi Fish

so who is going to move it to /obsolete ?
and who volunteers to package gimp-plugin-wavelet-denoise (bug 2474) ;)

I'll take care of both, but any collaboration is welcome :-)

I'm going to close this bug as resolved fixed.

Regards

Status: NEW => RESOLVED
Resolution: (none) => FIXED