[Rpm-maint] RE: [packaging] RFC: Berlin Packaging API
Wichmann, Mats D
mats.d.wichmann at intel.com
Thu Feb 28 00:02:40 UTC 2008
packaging-bounces at lists.linux-foundation.org wrote:
> Subject: Re: [packaging] RFC: Berlin Packaging API
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 2:44 PM, Jeff Licquia <jeff at licquia.org>
>> > First, I''m not sure I agree that anything like this is needed.
>> We had hashed this out in Berlin, and Ian's mailing list message
>> summarized some of the reasons for this.
>> Do you have any specific questions or objections about the need for
> My main objection is that plain old packages rule,
> and vendor-supplied installers suck. Rather than
> inventing something new to make vendor-supplied
> installers integrate better into packaging systems,
> we should make the existing packaging systems
> work better for vendors.
Well, we've heard a number of times that there's not really
anything we can do, because vendors just want to roll their own -
particularly in cases where they support multiple systems
and want to have the same installer everywhere.
But I agree with your sentiments personally, and don't see
why we shouldn't consider that question too. Any suggestions
what might be proposed in this area, that wouldn't just get
rejected by the maintainers of the various packaging systems?
More information about the Rpm-maint