On Sat, 2005-11-26 at 14:52 +0000, Willem Riede wrote: > On 11/26/2005 12:39:07 AM, Jeremy Katz wrote: > > One thing that's fundamentally different with pup is that we're trying > > to get away from the package being (necessarily) the point of > > granularity. The hope is that we can actually get the update > > information available via the yum metadata so that we can instead > > provide more useful update information such as -- > > "New version of apache httpd daemon to fix security vulnerability foo" > > and then have all of the packages which are a part of that advisory > > grouped together rather than requiring you to know that you need all of > > httpd, httpd-devel and mod_ssl as a bunch. Since we don't have that > > metadata currently available (and never will for the development tree > > and probably also some other repositories), the fallback is to grouping > > packages by source RPM. > > That would be very cool. But dependancies already tend to bring in those > bunches together, don't they? Yes, which is why it's somewhat ludicrous that you select them individually :-) Why should I care that I'm getting both the i386 and x86_64 version of a new package. Or the base package and it's -devel component. They're just parts of the whole. Jeremy -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
