Moderation test

[Jeff Johnson]

On Dec 17, 2008, at 12:37 PM, Jeff Johnson wrote:

>
> On Dec 17, 2008, at 12:18 PM, Florian Festi wrote:
>
>> Jeff Johnson wrote:
>>>> No reason for moderating my posts other than that "They can." has  
>>>> been
>>>> supplied.
>>>>
>>>
>>> ... now what is the reason for moderating my posts?
>>
>> Aswering users' questions in a way suitable for an rpm5.org list[1]  
>> has
>> earned you this moderation flag. This is an rpm.org mailing list  
>> and any
>> posts that are not relating to rpm.org are off topic[2]. Promoting  
>> other
>> packaging software is definitely off topic. If you want to  
>> advertise rpm5
>> use an rpm5.org mailing list, please!
>>
>
> Correct. Please note my recent (but not yet through moderator  
> approval)
> changes removing all mention of @rpm.org, citing only RFE's  
> @bugzilla.redhat.com,
> specifically answering user questions seen on <rpm-list at rpm.org>,  
> and pointing
> out irrelevancies where needed.
>

Please note the __ABSENCE__ of moderator approval for the posting  
regarding
not only the feasibility, but also the sanity, of RPM "package  
bundles" that I
referred to.

I prefer to demonstrate the feasibility (and sanity) of RPM package  
bundles rather
than discuss moderation. However, it does seem rather ironic that my  
reply to an
RFE from <rpm-list at rpm.org> here
	http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-list/2008-December/000041.html
and a bugzilla RFE here
	https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474704
-- both of which are quite clearly filed against the rpm.org  
implementation --
has qualified me for moderation because I included a URI to suggested
solutions posted to another list. Whatever ...

But there is no need to actually solve any remaining flaws to  
demonstrate
that "package bundles" are both feasible and sane, the existing  
rpm-4.6.0
implementation can/will produce and install "package bundles" quite  
nicely AFAIK.

To demonstrate that point, I will produce a "package bundle" of  
rpm-4.6.0,
and use rpm-4.6.0 to install the "package bundle", in order to show that
indeed, rpm-4.6.0 "package bundles" are feasible and sane.

I will post a pointer to the rpm-4.6.0 "package bundles" when done and  
report an
issues or problems with rpm-4.6.0 installing rpm-4.6.0 "package  
bundles" to the rpm-4.6.0
<rpm-list at rpm.org> "General discussion about the RPM package manager"  
mailing
list in case other rpm-4.6.0 users are interested in using rpm-4.6.0 to
produce rpm-4.6.0 "package bundles".

Subject to moderator approval of course.

73 de Jeff
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4664 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-list/attachments/20081218/1fbfde2f/attachment.bin