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