RPM roadmapping

[Panu Matilainen]

On Sun, 28 Jul 2007, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:

>>>>>> "DP" == Dimi Paun <dimi at lattica.com> writes:
>
> DP> My proposal is to implement this where it belongs (in rpmbuild),
>
> I can't disagree with that.
>
> DP> and issue warnings (and ignore) any attempt to set the build root
> DP> or to rm -rf it from within the spec.
>
> I must disagree with that; these statements will be required for
> compatibility with old versions of RPM (see EPEL4) for many years to
> come.  I don't particularly want to fork a different version of my
> specfiles when there's no need.

Welcome to world of rpm: people want progress but no change.

See the discussion regarding setting a sane default buildroot: 
https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/pipermail/rpm-maint/2007-February/000162.html 
Lots of talk, no real consensus was reached because changing it one way or 
the other breaks compatibility for somebody.

Maybe these things would need a new incompatible "spec 2" format (one that 
actually has defined grammar etc) that fixes various insanities in the 
current non-format and forces people to fork the specs for good :)

 	- Panu -