Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add optional Class: attribute into Preamble (#236)
Closed #236. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/236#event-1469344602___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add optional Class: attribute into Preamble (#236)
Yeah, Group already exists and yet nobody these days sees it as serving anything useful, so adding another classifier tag doesn't seem that productive. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/236#issuecomment-364909049___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add optional Class: attribute into Preamble (#236)
I've made a prototype of what I had in mind: https://pagure.io/lamp and it is just a normal package, in the end. It probably will be able to pass the Fedora standard package review process so the Class attribute is probably not needed. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/236#issuecomment-309665749___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add optional Class: attribute into Preamble (#236)
@clime Also, you could just reuse the `Group:` tag for this purpose. I'm not sure why you need new metadata tags... -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/236#issuecomment-309190760___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add optional Class: attribute into Preamble (#236)
Some kind of this has been discussed in #107.. Basically having `Class` or how you name does not make sense for RPM until it should be handling it differently (which doesn't make sense for RPM from simple POV).. In theory it could start changing RPM behaviour like stop adding debuginfo packages and add some different subpackage... But you really need to describe how is that should be useful. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/236#issuecomment-308974790___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add optional Class: attribute into Preamble (#236)
Why not to add `Provides: rpm(class) = container`? -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/236#issuecomment-308974123___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Add optional Class: attribute into Preamble (#236)
Hello, right now, spec files do not have any 'type' identifier, which means, they all need to be treated the same way in a distribution. If they contained a class specifier, there could be two (or more) types of packages, each with a different set of requirements given to them by a distribution standard (e.g. Fedora Packaging Guidelines for Fedora distribution). This might be very useful because with containers, the rpm packages can be constrained less heavily in what they can do in the system. At the same time, it will be useful to mark those packages as having those extended capabilities so that user (and tooling like a package manager) knows what to expect from them. That's why this information should be ideally stored in rpm header to be easily accessible to everyone. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/236___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
