ATrpms and FC5/RHEL5
jeff.pitman at gmail.com
Sun Jan 1 05:57:32 UTC 2006
On 1/1/06, Chris Adams <cmadams at hiwaay.net> wrote:
> Once upon a time, John Ellson <ellson at research.att.com> said:
> > However, I doubt that overlaps can be completely eliminated, or that
> > it is even desirable to completely eliminate them, so I think it is
> > more important to have a clear mechanism to allow the user to control
> > the default choice, and to be able to override it if desired.
> The best thing would be for the third-party repos to be split into
> overlapping and non-overlapping. Anything that doesn't replace a Core
> or Extras package (or require such a package) could go in a
> non-overlapping repo and things that does could go in an "alternatives"
It could be doable. But, it would be inconsistent in some cases and
also would be a major set back as things would have to be
restructured. For example, the reason there are so many overlapping
packages between RPMforge and Extras is that the goals have diverged.
RPMforge maintains specs in a way that will make them compatible with
a wide range of distros. Extras is more of a laser-beam,
forward-looking approach. There are groups of people who fall under
the banners of either side.
The fact of the matter is, is that the user *chose* to integrate the
third party repo into their system. The act of doing this should come
with responsibility. Protecting them will do nothing to help the
More information about the fedora-devel-list