On Fri, 2007-01-12 at 17:18 -0500, Fernando Nasser wrote:
Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Friday 12 January 2007 17:01, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote:
>> Given that we cannot solve the grouping issues currently, I think now we
>> can make a special exception for the jpp packages (and ONLY the jpp
>> packages), where they can continue to use the jpp tag in Fedora until we
>> solve the grouping problem. When we have a workable alternative, then we
>> will drop the jpp tag from use in Fedora.
> I still don't like special cases, but I can live with this, so long as actual
> attempts at fixing this long term are being made.
Oh, I totally agree with that. I am advocating that the 'jpp' letters
stay there only out of necessity, will be really pleased of getting rid
of them when a more clean mechanism becomes available.
Tom and I have been thinking about how this will work when the new goups
functionality is in place and it appears to both of us that will be more
than enough to attain all the goals.
In the long run, a Njpp upstream version will just become N.1 in Fedora
when imported. We will always know what the last sync point was and the
groups mechanism will take care of the rest.
P.S.: We need some command line additions to both rpm and yum. The rpm
one will probably be available as it makes sense to expose the new group
functionality (besides programatically). We may have to contribute
patches to yum ourselves though, which we may need for other reasons anyway.
I like the sound of this as long as we agree on what the goals are for
grouping. What functionality do you need to enable? What commandline
switches do you need yum and rpm to provide? Rpm doesn't figure into
the long-term grouping strategy at all so everything will probably be
done at a higher level.