On Mon, Jul 30, 2007 at 03:20:49PM -0600, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On 7/30/07, Ray Van Dolson <rvandolson at esri.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 30, 2007 at 11:08:49PM +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > > > > So after the fact everyone can claim anything. The important thing is > > > how did epel (or better said certain key persons in there) deal with > > > it when they did not see the political ramifications they inflicted > > > upon themselves? > > > > I understand how a lot of it "went down" (saw the meetings and am on > > the lists as well), I'm just wondering if that aside (I know, hard to > > do :), could there feasibly be an RPM-based solution to this that would > > make repo-tags obsolete? > > > > Not sure if in RPM itself (in its current incarnations). It would be > sort of a layer above it that at its simplest is the yum priorities > list.. and in a more complicated version would rank against rpm > signatures so that package X with X1 signature could not replace > anything with Y1 signatures. Only reason I ask about the RPM-based solution is that (at least to me) it would seem to be the cleanest way to do it -- to store the equivalent of the "repository" or origination inside a defined field within the RPM... something that could be actually spit out via a queryformat query. And the RPM guys are actively seeking feature suggestions right now. It doesn't seem to me this would be too hard, but I'm _far_ from knowledgeable on RPM-internals so maybe there are other hurdles. > However, even if it were possible, I doubt it would stop it being > brought up every couple of weeks.. I don't anticipate bridges ever being fully mended over this unfortunately, but it would be nice to move past it if possible and look at other technical solutions to the issue. I think most people agreed the repotag was a temoprary solution at best.... Ray