Re: metadata layout problems and some history

* seth vidal <[email protected]> [Aug 12. 2010 14:15]:
> On Thu, 2010-08-12 at 13:39 +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> > > So help me understand what would make your situation better? What would
> > > make the rpm-md less problematic for smart?
> > 
> 
> > XML works fine for the raw dump part, except that it's hideously bloated 
> > format for what it's used for and expensive to parse (dejavu 
> > yum-metadata-parser again), and isn't good for indexing or searching.
> > Heck, a dumb tagged plain-text file would be much better suited for apt 
> > (and I assume smart). I've vague memories of Suse actually having such a 
> > format at some point before switching to repodata.
> 
> Yes, that was my point in starting this discussion.
> 
> But what I've been hearing so far is "don't change anything, just let it
> be".

Thats not what you should hear, it should rather be "Don't hurry the
change".

Klaus
---
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)

_______________________________________________
Rpm-metadata mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.baseurl.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-metadata