On Fri, 17 Dec 2004, seth vidal wrote: > > How would you distinct > > > > > foo-1.0-1.fc3.zork.i386.rpm > > > foo-1.0-1.fc3.dag.i386.rpm > > I wouldn't. They wouldn't be in the same repository. And if they're in > different repositories then they'll have different checksums/pkgids. And people cannot select a package based on checksum/pkgid from the command line. I rest my case. > > if both zork and dag were ommitted ? You don't think it's useful, I think > > it helps. > > nope. Just means a user thinks something is from somewhere by looking at > the filename, not looking at the content or the signature. Correct, at the same time people can see when a repository is misleading people. It's functional as an identifier to select a package or to see what the origin is in Yum/Apt output. Again, from a strict principal point of view you're correct. > > If you use different repositories and there's no coordination, there's no > > proper way to compare the release tags anyway. The discussion about either > > the disttag or the vendortag are useless. > > not really. It's a start to figuring out how to revert 'release' back to > a useful field. Why is that necessary ? Why do you consider the current release field less useful ? Having a disttag and vendortag in the release tag (and filename) is _very_ useful. Maybe not to you, but to many others (both in bugreports or just as an identifier to select packages). > > > It's, at best, an easy false positive match and it reduces > > > available namespace for items usable in the release tag. > > > > "It reduces available namespace for items usable in the release tag" ?? > > > > Can't compute, please elaborate. > > It limits the possible items that can be put in the release field. What is the limit of the release field and what is more useful to add then what's strictly necessary and the dist/vendor tag ? > You pollute the namespace by adding non-release-numbering data there. > ie: .dag., .fr., .fdr. > > it's just extra cruft that makes it harder to discern what is > real/useful. Sorry, Seth, I disagree. I see 'useful' in a less strict sense. I consider other uses than only the version comparison. And it does not interfere with that and there's no other harm. But then again, if you're talking as the authority repository and don't see a use in 3rd party repositories, there's no need for a repotag. But for a complete other reason. Kind regards, -- dag wieers, dag@xxxxxxxxxx, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- [all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power]