Fedora Project launches Pre-Extras

[Féliciano Matias]

Le dimanche 19 décembre 2004 à 02:51 +0100, Dag Wieers a écrit :

Hi.
I don't read all the thread :-)
Sorry.

> On Sat, 18 Dec 2004, seth vidal wrote:
> (snip)
> No, we're giving people a list of advantages.
> 
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2004-December/msg00498.html
> (snip)
> It's not marketing, people care to see where the package comes from.
> Please do everyone a favor and read those advantages, I hate to repeat 
> myself but you keep ignoring what we (I'm not alone) think is important.

I don't like this. When I see "8.1.fc3.fr" ou "0.lvn.2.3", I think :
- what is it ?
"fr" for french ?
"lvn" ?
Is there something magic ?
Does this try to mislead the depsolver ? And why ?

I don't need this. It's confusing. It's a pollution :-)
My packages are in :
dag/i386
dag/SRPMS
freshrpms/...
livna/...

No confusion.
If I want to know where the package come from I use "rpm -q -i" or "rpm
-q --queryformat "%{VENDOR}\n"" or "yum info <package name>".

Release should be the release.
Why not to add if it's a stable or unstable package ?
Base, update, testing or rawhide package ?
And the "OS" field, the "LICENSE" field.
They are useful informations.
Perhaps harmless and useful for some people, but confusing the end user
(like me).

> > > They don't confuse and there's no good alternative and I want/need this 
> > > functionality.

Use "rpm -q --queryformat".
Perhaps yum could implement something useful like "--queryformat".

> Pollution is harmful, this is harmless.

Pollution can be harmless for someone and harmful for other.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/attachments/20041219/f0a94809/attachment.sig>