Re: primary refinement

On Feb  6, 2005, seth vidal <[email protected]> wrote:

> summary
> description

I see a lot of value in moving these out to a separate xml file, with
the extra benefit that these are the most important bits for
translation (changelog would be the other bit)

> packager
> license
> vendor
> group
> buildhost

I'm not so sure about these.  I'd guess most repos wouldn't benefit
much from moving these out, since they tend to have the same, or
rather similar, packager, vendor and buildhost; license and group tend
to be one from a small set.  I.e., all of these should compress very
well.

> url (url for the package, not url location of the rpm)

Not sure about this one.  It's not useful for translation, so having
it in say pkgdesc.xml (like summary and description) would be a bit of
a waste if pkgdesc.lang.xml had to duplicate it, but having to get
both pkgdesc.xml and pkgdesc.lang.xml to obtain it along with the
package description is an even bigger waste.  Any idea of how much
space the urls actually take for say the FC3 repo?

-- 
Alexandre Oliva             http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}