[Fedora-packaging] Re: Mail voting on kmdl adoption

Axel Thimm Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Mon Aug 14 23:31:42 UTC 2006


On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 02:15:59PM -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> >>>>> "JK" == Jesse Keating <jkeating at redhat.com> writes:
> 
> JK> Or, instead of introducing the insanity of uname-r in name, we can
> JK> put effort into adjusting rpm and yum to handle this sort of
> JK> package situation correctly.
> 
> It seems like what we really need is some sort of two-dimensional
> versioning.  I guess everyone will just laugh at me for suggesting it,

I'm not, that's exactly the issue here.

> but for a plugin/module "foo" having version "M" which works with
> "packageA" version "N", just call it "packageA-module-foo-M,N", teach
> the depsolvers how to deal with it, and get on with life.

That can take half a decade, so we should find a solution for now and
lobby with our experiences for rpmng's design.

This is off-topic, but I really thing that at some time in the future
our group could start thinking about setting up specifications for a
new package manager trying to learn from rpm's deficiencies and trying
to unearth a project for that.
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/attachments/20060815/c4f98d63/attachment.sig>


More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list