[Rpm-metadata] xml update

[Jeff Licquia]

On Thu, 2003-10-16 at 13:24, Joe Shaw wrote:
> 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".

http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html#s-priorities
says: required, important, standard, optional, and extra.  Standard and
above are always put on by the Debian installer unless specifically
overriden.  Required packages can't be removed by apt without jumping
through hoops.  Optional and extra are distinguished by feature; if
multiple packages support a feature, one may be "optional" or higher;
the rest must be "extra".  For example, the standard MTA for Debian is
exim, at priority "important"; postfix, sendmail, etc. are therefore all
priority "extra".

I'm not sure how this would best map to RC priorities.

> 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.

I think we'd want to either nail down a standard priority regime or set
up translation tables first.

Maybe priority regimes could be set as an attribute?

<priority system="debian">required</priority>