[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Voting: repotag for EPEL



Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
[...]
The reasons why I don't vote like this ATM: Currently I would vote "no",
as there is no proper solution for repotags in our spec files ATM
(abusing dist is more them sub-optimal, as dist is optional, and thus we
would have a repotag only in a subset of out packages, which IMHO makes
not much sense). But in real life it's no "no" -- if the Packaging
Committee is fine with having a repotag and presents a solution that
makes it easy to move packages between Fedora and EPEL without
adjustments then I would "abstrain", because I don't care about it
(well, in fact I'm a slightly bit against repotags, as we have a field
in the rpm header that serves the same purpose; having a information in
two places sounds wrong to me, but I'm willing to ignore that).
Maybe we could ship an alias or something which would execute a command similar to rpm -q --qf %{vendor} ? I suggest this because I am afraid that adding this flag by default to rpm -q would break other things..
.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]