Dag Wieers wrote:
The problem with such a scheme of course is that it requires a change to RPM (and all RPM related tools),I know, I know - I'm more thinking ahead to when the tag mangling goes away :-)
In the meantime, the current direction of the package naming looks good. So far it's letting me define a local naming policy of:
%{name}-%{verison}-%{release}.%{local_release}.%{repo}Where:
%{release}: Upstream release version if it exists otherwise |0| (zero).
%{local_release}: Local release version that adheres to the same rules as the Fedora release field if %{release} is 0, otherwise use a single integer.
%{repo}: Local repo tag.
I suspect that many Fedora users have their own local repos (maybe not as big as FreshRPMs or Dag :-) ) and being able to define a naming policy that works with upstream is a good thing. A common example of what we need to do is to patch Fedora rpms with things that haven't been integrated yet or to add some feature to the build options.
Carwyn
