[Rpm-metadata] xml update

[Panu Matilainen]

On Thu, 2003-10-16 at 21:24, Joe Shaw wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-10-16 at 13:40, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > > I agree on "what is specific to particular packaging tool" part BUT
> > > things like priority and Enhances are general concepts which *could* be
> > > used by other tools as well. Lets say redcarpet adds support for
> > > priority.. and then we have two different entries for the thing, one for
> > > apt-rpm and one for redcarpet, both having the same data. Oh and one
> > > more place to present that in Debian world...
> > 
> > I don't have a problem either way, but I will point out that there's no
> > reason why, say, Red Carpet couldn't make use of the "deb" namespace
> > when adding support for priority:
> 
> And just as a data point: Red Carpet already uses a priority for
> updates, displaying the highest urgency to the user for the updates
> between the current installed version and the latest version available
> in the various repos.
> 
> We're using "necessary", "urgent", "suggested", "feature", and "minor". 
> I don't really know enough about the deb format for these, but one
> problem we have with apt repos (both deb and rpm) is that all updates
> currently show up as "suggested".
> 
> We might have to wedge a different scheme into the 5 we currently use,
> but I think that's probably ok.
> 
> So I am down for a general use priority field.

Mm.. "Priority" in apt (well, Debian) is somewhat different:
"Essential", "Important", "Standard", "Extra" and "Optional" if memory
serves, categorizing a package somewhere between "this is needed for the
system to boot" and "extra maps for game foo", doesn't have "urgent"
(update I presume) type of thing at all. Adding support aint hard
though...

	- Panu -