Re: status questions
Joe Shaw <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.rpm.metadata |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <1068060918.7947.6.camel@bacon> |
On Tue, 2003-11-04 at 01:31, seth vidal wrote: > Hi everyone, > I was just wondering what people think of what we've come up with so > far. Does it seem workable for all the various projects/programs? Are > you comfortable with the file layout? Things seem well. What happens when you run the script on a directory with multiple versions of a package? > - are the checksum-style ids consistent/compliant for everyone? For RC it'll mean increased memory/processing overhead, as everything is done based on nevr. It would be worthwhile making that an element in the additional metadata files instead of a comment now that I think about it more, but if not, we'll deal. > Also if this works out it might be useful to propose that this format be > given some sort of lsb-status (eventually) - I think Jeff J. originally > suggested this. Sounds okay, although I wouldn't bend over backward for it. I think if we all agree on it enough to add it to our projects that's endorsement enough (the freedesktop model as opposed to the lsb model). Joe