[Rpm-maint] silly idea for srpms

[seth vidal]

On Thu, 2010-12-09 at 20:17 +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> Yes, but it doesn't serve us very well.
> 

They are a relatively tidy, discrete unit you can fetch and get all the
info out of together. That is nice. 

If you want to talk about a new discrete unit for storing the same
information (build-info, file-layout, scriptlets, payload and patches)
then I'm ALL for that. But if we're going down that path can we just
toss specfiles under the bus and get a language that gives us more
control and predictability?

> I know there are plenty of use-cases for accessing the spec files. I'm 
> just claiming we'd be better off with specs stored separately alongside 
> the full src.rpm's somewhere in the (source) repositories, and teach the 
> tools about them. Then you don't have to work around the annoyance that 
> srpm is.

I suspect the biggest issue is then needing to have a signature on the
spec file as well as on the pkg.

<shrug>

-sv