Axel Thimm wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 11:29:25AM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> You'll have to remind me why anyone wants different same-named packages
>> with differences the end user doesn't understand and can't control to
>> exist at all before I can comment on a solution about managing them.
>
> Let's assume no one wants that (I think I don't). Shouldn't you be
> chasing the repo that just created the duplicates instead of the ones
> that supported RHEL/CentOS over years now?
>
> And before you rightfully extend the argument - as far as duplicates
> between RPMForge/Dag, Dries, Karan Extras, CentOS Extras SL contrib
> and ATrpms are concerned: We're working *together* on eliminating
> them.
And yet, conflicts have always kept popping up, and I can't see any
provision you make to enable additional repositories to exist without
coordinating with your rules. The issue is that there is only one
namespace which is the part that doesn't make sense and can't work
without a single authority or a hierarchial structure, and I can't come
up with a reason that you should be that authority.
> We're too old for clone wars, the only kid on the block that
> wants to play by its own rules is on another list, go patronize it ;)
The LFHS is the problem here, although putting applications where you
want them in the filesystem would make Linux as hard to use as the Mac.
Oh wait...
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell at gmail.com