[Rpm-metadata] status questions

[Joe Shaw]

On Tue, 2003-11-04 at 01:31, seth vidal wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>  I was just wondering what people think of what we've come up with so
> far. Does it seem workable for all the various projects/programs? Are
> you comfortable with the file layout? 

Things seem well.  What happens when you run the script on a directory
with multiple versions of a package?

>  - are the checksum-style ids consistent/compliant for everyone?

For RC it'll mean increased memory/processing overhead, as everything is
done based on nevr.  It would be worthwhile making that an element in
the additional metadata files instead of a comment now that I think
about it more, but if not, we'll deal.

> Also if this works out it might be useful to propose that this format be
> given some sort of lsb-status (eventually) - I think Jeff J. originally
> suggested this.

Sounds okay, although I wouldn't bend over backward for it.  I think if
we all agree on it enough to add it to our projects that's endorsement
enough (the freedesktop model as opposed to the lsb model).

Joe