On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 14:42:14 +0100
Jan Zelený <jzeleny(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 29. 3. 2013 at 13:22:40, Petr Pisar wrote:
> On 2013-03-29, Jan Zelený <jzeleny(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> > In this case we proposed another solution which was turned down
> > (I'm not sure exactly why):
> >
> > Each package requiring multiversion support would have all these
> > versions almost the same as they are right now. The only
> > difference would be that there is a metapackage pointing at all
> > time to the latest version.
>
> Because metapackages are considered evil in Fedora (I'm not sure
> exactly why).
To be perfectly honest I don't know either. But I already have half a
dozen use cases on my table where metapackages can help. Perhaps it's
time to re- consider this policy?
Metapackages have, in the past, been a problem b/c most folks were
using them in place of comps groups. The usage you're describing doesn't
sound like the end of the world but go through a test set of what
happens when someone adds obsoletes/provides to a metapackage.
-sv