On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 23:15:25 +0100 (CET), Dag Wieers wrote: > On Sat, 18 Dec 2004, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > > On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 08:57:23 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > > > > > On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 11:58:45 +0100, nodata <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > An rpm tool doesn't care about the filename, so why remove it? > > > > > > You have missed the point entirely. The filaname for an rpm is > > > typically constructed from a number of header tags as part of the > > > build process. The distrotags that are being used arent just in the > > > filename they are in the RELEASE tag. > > > > Which is part of the problem. > > Please indicate where the problem is. Done that before in this thread. > The current scheme has the following advantages: > > + It allows people to build trust for packages because the source becomes > visible (this works in both ways, if a package is good or bad) *gasp* Please tell me that you just made a joke. People should _never_ deduce the origin of a package from its filename. [They may start to trust the signer of packages and the signed packages which come from him.]