Re: Re: Practice, use, design and implementation of rpm

On Saturday 02 October 2004 00:53, Axel Thimm wrote:
> If/When repo-coord comes to any good suggestions on rpm extensions,
> we can summarize the outcome and present it here :)

So, where do we go from here?  Past discussion points really have never 
been driven to a consensus.  Good arguments have been presented but 
we've never driven across a consistent front on the issues.  I realize 
some of these things may take time as more and more implementations are 
out in the wild.

I'd like to see a common strategy set forth on:

1. disttag naming (rh* vs. 1.fc2, etc.)

2. vendor tag

3. packager tag

4. distribution tag

5. distro detectors for %if

6. ... more stuff here ...

I know the arguments for #1.

Morten brought up some ideas for #2 through #4.

I sent in a piece on the mach list about detecting distros wrt #5 and 
many shot it down as being the wrong way to do things. And, now the 
issue is brought up as being useful for rebuilding src.rpms.

Although my repo is still in the testing phase, its release we'll see 
packages for legacy Redhat, Fedora, and SuSE 9.1.  The issues I've run 
into have been interesting to say the least and dealing with 
BuildRequires, etc. would be a lot easier than relying on hand hacking 
comments in the spec files.

I believe the ultimate achievement of consensus would be able to codify 
this into a succinct document containing signatories, "Axel, Dag, 
Dries, Fernando, Link, Matthias, Rex, Rudolf, et al".  It could even 
have a section called "Here's How We Hack RPM Now; But, Here's How It 
Could Change To Make It Mucho Better".

Discuss away! ;-)

take care,
-- 
-jeff