RPM roadmapping

Robert Scheck robert at fedoraproject.org
Fri Jul 27 17:55:14 UTC 2007

Evening folks,

On Fri, 27 Jul 2007, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> I know I'm opening up Pandoras box here but what the heck, it's Friday and 
> I'm feeling slightly bored...

looks like you've the wrong job...maybe we should switch ;-)

> The more specific you can be, the better - "make it not suck" isn't 
> productive. Of course there's no way everything can be done, we want the 
> next major release out before end of the decade... Also this is not a 
> voting where most votes guarantee implementation, but consider it your 
> chance to be heard. I'm listening... :)

when reading your ideas or how ever you're calling it, it looks as you
would like to come up with the same roadmap rpm5.org already has - but just
nearly two month later. And when reading rpm5-devel from the last two
month, you're proposing more or less the same ideas, the rpm5 team and
developers already talked about; read yourself:

  - http://rpm5.org/roadmap/
  - http://rpm5.org/community/rpm-devel/

But I've also one wish regarding the features of rpm.org: Let rpmrc die as
soon as possible, please. As you're also at the rpm5-devel mailing list,
you should know what I'm talking about here, don't you?

On Fri, 27 Jul 2007, dragoran wrote:
> arch requires and provides ... to end the endless multilib discussions ;)
> should be automatic until the packager say Requires: foo.arch

IIRC this feature is already since beginning of May 2007 in rpm5.org, try
or e.g. look at http://rpm5.org/cvs/chngview?cn=7070.

On Fri, 27 Jul 2007, Till Maas wrote:
> I am missing "soft dependencies", e.g. the possibility to make a package
> suggest which other packages may enhance it, e.g. with plugins. Afaik in
> debian packages it is called "Suggests:".

AFAIK, this is part of rpm5.org since end of October 2005 as "Suggests:"
and "Enhances:", just read http://rpm5.org/cvs/chngview?cn=6089 and also
http://rpm5.org/cvs/chngview?cn=6111, PLD Linux wrote a patch to use these
features within yum, but yum upstream refuses this patch without a real

On Fri, 27 Jul 2007, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> A working %posttrans or equivalent.

What is broken/not working at %posttrans?

On Fri, 27 Jul 2007, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> Another thing I forgot: I'd love if rpm could become smart enough in
> handling directories, so that we don't need to add tons of artifical
> dependencies just to manually manage directory ownership.

Hum? Could you give more details regarding this? Are you thinking about
auto-manage ownership of directories? I don't think, this is a good idea,
but rpm5.org is able to tell you orphaned parent directories and dangling
symlinks since April 2006. IIRC http://rpm5.org/cvs/chngview?cn=6412 or

On Fri, 27 Jul 2007, Jesse Keating wrote:
> directory -> symlink upon upgrade, and all the sort of similar fun.

I'm not sure, but I thought, this theme have been aten at rpm5.org.

My personal conclusion is, that as of the moment, many expected features
are already part of rpm5.org for a longer time. Oh, I forgot, some Red Hat
people don't like some rpm5.org team members</sarcasm>. But this are just
my 2 cents regarding this topic as rpm5.org member and Fedora user... ;-)


More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list