[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RPM v6 package format draft, major update (Discussion #2919)

[Panu Matilainen]

Heh, I didn't remember the workaround for 3.x, that's pretty funny. That would've been added by a rather green me, probably in 2007 or so, thinking this checking is a good thing. And then nobody thought to update the name when the new payload format was added years later. It's annoying how much that little slip some ten years ago is hurting just now.

It's something to consider. While v6 always uses the new non-cpio payload, the community has shown interest in other types of payload too, and having a clean mechanism for this would of course be nice. 

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2919#discussioncomment-8553156
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <rpm-software-management/rpm/repo-discussions/2919/comments/8553156 at github.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-maint/attachments/20240221/28e03193/attachment.html>