walters@xxxxxxxxxx (Colin Walters) writes: > One thing that should be clear is that by using a revision control > system for RPM packaging, we've already conceptually broken > compatibility because the SRPM is no longer the preferred form of > modification, to use the GPL terminology. CVS can not replace SRPM: - SRPM can be signed, CVS not - SRPM are (usually) working, while the CVS checkout might be a completely broken development snapshot - SRPM give you reproducibility, CVS not - SRPM can be better accessed (e.g. in a browsable http/ftp listing); for CVS you need tags which are more difficultly to handle - SRPM are buildable with system-tools (rpmbuild); for CVS you need lots of prerequisites. (- a known CVS drawback: cvs checkin/checkout is not atomic) Enrico
