On Friday, 29 June 2007, at 14:28:46 (-0500),
Tim Mooney wrote:

> I was thinking mainly of the application vendors when I replied
> earlier -- companies like EMC, Oracle, IBM, etc., that want to claim
> that their application supports at least RHEL, SuSE, and possibly
> other rpm-based distributions.  It's their packaging people (or
> monkeys, as the case may be) that will focus on the minimal subset,
> in the interest of making their packages install on the widest range
> of rpm-based distributions.

If that's the assumption we're operating under, should we even bother
trying to allow ISV rpmdb entries?

I'm more inclined to think in the opposite direction:  add important
features that ISV's can't live without so that they will pressure
distributions to update to and support those features.

Michael

-- 
Michael Jennings (a.k.a. KainX)  http://www.kainx.org/  <mej@kainx.org>
n + 1, Inc., http://www.nplus1.net/       Author, Eterm (www.eterm.org)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 "You came from heaven to Earth to show the way; from the Earth to the
  cross, my debt to pay.  From the cross to the grave, from the grave
  to the sky.  Lord, I lift your name on high."           -- Maranatha