Ville Skyttä wrote:
IMO that would be too much dictating local policies from our part, and subject to inherent distributed bitrot because folks usually download jpackage.repo only once. And I'm sure this stuff would not be limited to postgresql-jdbc.
I don't understand your argument. Are you saying that the file can never be changed? Probably, it should be put into it's own package in the Fedora repos. There's a larger question here. What is the "co-existence strategy" for JPackage and Fedora Core? I'm trying to figure out how to set up a Java development/Tomcat server environment on FC4, and I'm very unsure how to set things up so that yum doesn't eventually leave me with an incompatible mishmash of JPackage (Java) and Fedora (gcj) packages.
Maybe the FC postgresql-jdbc package could have a versioned Provides: using the full version number (including the build) of the drivers it contains, like the corresponding JPP one has in its version field? Would that work the way you'd expect? (What would you expect, BTW?)
Getting the Fedora postgresql-jdbc package to somehow reflect the version of the driver would be a good start. I'm not sure how to do this, though. I haven't had great luck getting responses to bugs that I put into Red Hat's bugzilla, let alone RFEs. There's also the fact that the Fedora package contains multiple builds of the driver, for use with multiple JVM versions; the JPackage package only contains a single build (JDBC 3?). So even if the JPackage RPM were updated to a later driver version, there's a case for not replacing the Fedora package. Out of curiosity, what distributions *don't* include the PostgreSQL JDBC drivers? (I.e. why does the JPackage RPM exist?) Thanks! -- ======================================================================== Ian Pilcher i.pilcher@xxxxxxxxxxx ========================================================================
