[Rpm-metadata] two other areas needed

Darrin Thompson darrint at progeny.com
Mon Oct 6 15:58:02 UTC 2003

seth vidal wrote:
> my general opinion is this last file could be entirely optional, so if
> it is not present no one should be able to call foul, but it would be
> nice to define the file format so it could be used in a consistent way,
> if present.

It's a great idea. But so are a lot of other things.

It seems like the minimum functionality needed is two classes of files.

1. A single file which has repository wide scope. It points to complete 
metadata files and is extensible to point to other kinds of files.

2. A series of metadata files which contain large lists of package 
metadata. It is extensible to allow including metadata not applicable to 
most package formats.

You could, for instance, extend the repository wide file to point at 
metadata "indexes" for the benefit of yum. You could extend it to point 
at changelogs etc.

These cool things would all be extensions. Clients could ignore 
extensions they don't understand.

Darrin Thompson

More information about the Rpm-metadata mailing list