required and recommended

[Panu Matilainen]

On Wed, 2006-01-25 at 10:06 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On 1/25/06, Andreas Bierfert <andreas.bierfert at lowlatency.de> wrote:
> > I would love to see this in fc5 :) and of course fc and fe packages using it ^^
> 
> Unless the tools that live on top of librpm understand how to make use
> and to negotiate the new tags, having them be used in fc or fe
> packages isn't going to be particularly useful unless you do all your
> package administration via rpm on the cmdline.  In fact it might lead
> to unexpected and undesired behavior. I don't think these new tags
> should be allowed as part of FC or FE policy until its clear that the
> new tags behave as expected when the default in-core tools have to
> deal with them. And any understanding as to potentially problems is
> going to require some local system testing from people who are
> interested in using these tags in their packaging. I wouldn't hold
> your breath waiting for these new features to be acceptible packaging
> policy. I fully expect there is going to have to be work done to
> support these new tags by tools other than rpm cli.  Until we know
> where we stand with the tools that intereact with librpm, i say no
> dice.

Getting rpm 4.4.4 into FC5 would be the first step though. If it doesn't
go into FC5 it'll probably be yet another half a year before people will
even start looking into those things. I certainly would like to see rpm
>= 4.4.4 in FC5.

FWIW apt already has some rudimentary support for "suggests" in my
private tree:
https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/pipermail/rpm-devel/2006-January/000672.html

	- Panu -