Le 12/08/10 12:56, Dag Wieers a écrit : > On Thu, 12 Aug 2010, Yury V. Zaytsev wrote: > >> On Thu, 2010-08-12 at 11:52 +0200, Dag Wieers wrote: >> >>> (flex and make come to mind, there were a few others) >> Yes!!! >> >> Latest autotools, flex / bison, static packages for unsatisfiable >> dependencies such as curl, qt etc. All of this has no place in the >> standard base repository. >> >>> It could be: >>> >>> >>> What do people think ? >> From the aestetical point of view what bothers be is that rf is just 2 >> characters, while the rest is 3 characters long :-) > But on the upside, you shouldn't see those on "normal" systems :-) > > Which reminds me that I also did the proposal of creating an "extras" > repository, so: > > .rf. rpmforge stable (additional packages) > .rfb. rpmforge buildtools (buildtools, not required) > .rft. rpmforge testing (test stuff, no guarantee) > .rfx. rpmforge extras (packages replacing base) > > Not sure if rfx/extras is a good name for that repository. .rfp. rpmforge plus, as centosplus, seems better for me. JML > If we decide to do this, I guess we should start identifying those > packages that replace base, or require packages that replace base.