[Rpm-maint] Assorted changes in my rpm branch
skvidal at linux.duke.edu
Fri Dec 15 03:42:30 UTC 2006
On Thu, 2006-12-14 at 22:03 -0500, Peter Bowen wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-12-14 at 17:24 -0500, seth vidal wrote:
> > I think this is an excellent point and one we should work on.
> > 1. What are the set of things we need rpm to do now and in the future
> > 2. What are the set of things that need to be fixed in rpm and how well
> > does fixing them line up with 1?
> I would suggest that first "we" gets defined. There are really three
> different sets of RPM users, and each is going to have a different set
> of requirements:
> - People who create RPM packages
> - People who use the "rpm" command to manage packages
> - People who are writing tools that manage packages
> - Standards organizations who want a defined package file format
> These four groups are going to need different things, and quite possibly
> will use different portions of rpm.
Fair enough. I call into the first group and the 3rd group by and large.
I'd personally love to see less and less of people using the 'rpm'
command to manage packages and more going into higher level tools. Think
about it like dpkg. By and large few people use dpkg for daily tasks.
They use apt or some other higher-level tool. I'd like to see more of
that kind of separation in terms of the features included in either.
My main interests in rpm are in the library and the python bindings to
That's the 'we' I'm speaking of.
More information about the Rpm-maint