Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488968 --- Comment #13 from James Antill <james.antill@xxxxxxxxxx> 2009-03-06 18:46:08 EDT --- > Does this mean this package review will be blocked? I certainly hope so, it would be a significant mistake to ship this. > What about packages like smart and apt-rpm that do things differently to yum > and the core distro? Noone is saying you can't ship PK. I'm pretty sure noone cares about the review for the tools that generate/consume the metadata in this package. But if smart decided that the md5sums in our repomd.xml was hard to deal with, so they'd just ship a smart-pkg-data ... then, yeh, I'd say that was a bad idea and would try and block it. > Sure, but we search in the locale, and hence we need that data upfront. Again, the textual part of the data is _tiny_ ... even more so for updates (the bit that changes). And I'd be surprised if it changed anywhere near as often as primary/etc. The fact you have tied icons with the textual data in this implementation doesn't mean you have to continue to do that in another one. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review