[lsb-discuss] RPM decision process
Wichmann, Mats D
mats.d.wichmann at intel.com
Wed Apr 16 17:35:13 PDT 2008
> And the good news is that everyone supports the RPMv3 format --- and
> that is indeed a GOOD thing! Creating a standard which would force
> the enterprise distro's to upgrade to RPMv5 is just not interesting to
> us. Maybe that's what you and JBJ would like, since I'm sure you're
> convinced of the innate superiority of the RPMv5 technology. And
> perhaps you're even right. But regardless, it's not clear these new
> features that you and JBJ tout in RPM5 are useful for ISV's in the
> general case. (Or even the features implied by the RPMv4 package
> format, for that matter.)
again, this is an overloading of terms.
everybody supports the rpm4 package format, and has since sles8 was
the straggler (I think it was sles8, could have been older - this
was the *only* reason the spec called out the v3 package format).
the rpm5.org technology is not incompatible with the v4 format,
and is itself not under discussion anyway because the LSB doesn't
talk about the tool you use for package management, only about the
file format (actually we do need a tool you can call, but that's
a different story - the creature that's been known as lsbinstall).
More information about the lsb-discuss