On Wed, 19 Nov 2003, Lamar Owen wrote:
> On Wednesday 19 November 2003 11:59 am, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > Lamar Owen writes:
> > > Hey, Peter, for one who consistently complains about lack of consistency
> > > in naming, you completely diregarded the precedent that has previously
> > > been set for naming RPM releases (regardless of the source).
>
> > These are SuSE RPMs. They were build by SuSE following the conventions
> > that SuSE has used for their past releases. So who are we to argue with
> > that?
>
> The place they were put. The 'customary place' has been
> v{version}/RPMS/{distribution} so that they would be in
> pub/binary/v7.4/RPMS/suse-{version}. Their source RPM would go there
> too. I have no problem with the name of the RPM's themselves, just
> where they were put. As long as they don't have a PGDG in the release
> tag I'm happy with the package names.
Actually, ummm ... what if I were to upload FreeBSD binaries? I think:
/pub/binary/v7.4/{suse|redhat|freebsd|solaris} makes more sense, no?
the RPMS at the top directory made sense when it was only RPMS that were
being provided, but ...
