[Rpm-metadata] xml update

[Jeff Johnson]

Daniel Veillard wrote:

>    - it's a bit of a shame that the provides and requires really
>      can't be shared, but well maybe that reflect the differences
>      in semantic of both formats :-\
>

Yes, a shame. I know of no reason why these can't be shared, but perhaps 
I've
overlooked some message in the spew of Fedora mail.

I'd also suggest (again) unifying name with version in entry so that
     <entry name="rpm" flags="GE">
        <version epoch="0" ver="4.1.1"/>
     </entry>
becomes
    <entry name="rpm" flags="GE"  epoch="0" ver="4.1.1"/>

as an EVR always has an N associated. If written that way, an entry 
could be used
for the package NEVR as well as other uses. All but name and ver optional,
default to
    flags="EQ"
    epoch="0"
    release="0"

Off to dig out the reasoniing for the changes again again again ...

73 de Jeff