[Mageia-dev] RPM5 AND MAGEIA

Michael Scherer misc at zarb.org
Wed Mar 9 00:53:04 CET 2011

Le mardi 08 mars 2011 à 23:59 +0100, Raphaël Jadot a écrit :

> The mails are hard to read, and long, and very technicals,  but what
> catched my eyes is some things like
> "level of compatibility" between Mageia & rpm5 is far greater than any
> other (with
> other rpm5 based distros being more compatible with Mageia than Mageia
> is with non-rpm5 based distros as well"
> So it doesn't mean we have to move to rpm5 for being compatible with
> rpm5, so where is the problem ?

So if there is no problem, why do people keep talking of this ?

> So if Per Oyvind offers help, unless there are hidden things i do not
> understand, and if he can improve rpm.org or compatibility stuff or
> whatever, why nobody says "ok, why not, tell us, maybe you could help,
> maybe not" Did not find it (at least in this ML)

I personally answered at least on others mls :
( http://lists.mandriva.com/maintainers/2011-02/msg00080.php )

I also answered to peroyvind on irc, but I will not disclose logs of
private discussion.

I said it to unity guy who asked on #mageia-dev ( maybe he didn't pay
attention, or maybe he was not looking at the screen at this moment ).

It was also explained during one of the first meeting for packagers who
asked : 

So, for the n+1 time, we have no specific stuff to propose to
collaborate nor ressources to allocate for the moment, because we are
busy trying to have a infrastructure and a governance structure ready,
and this take time. We even did a conference on FOSDEM to explain the
whole process. 

If people want to do it fine, but without a clear proposal and people
working on doing stuff, nothing will happen. And we clearly told we have
more urgent things, like doing a first release, organizing, etc.

> Seems it's not the first time, in this mail
> https://www.mageia.org/pipermail/mageia-dev/20110109/002024.html
> he told  "(if interested, I could help assist you on writing something
> equivalent for compatibility wrapping similar to what I did in the
> past with rpm4compat.h & rpm46compat.h to make ie. URPM able to use
> rpm 4.4 & 4.6 api with rpm5, let's say rpm5compat.h or something).
> Whatever you end up doing, don't be afraid of asking or trying to
> communicate on, the mutual benefits of collaboration are rather
> obvious. <;o)
> If not, sorry for imposing."
> This mail had no answer, so what, is this guy a kind of antichrist of
> rpm , talking with sugar words and trying to backstab you ?

Using religious vocabulary and exaggeration is IMHO something you should
avoid. It doesn't help.

> And at least, If the question are asked over and over, why is there so
> few things in archives about it ? 

I suspect that you do not correctly connect the dots.

We have made quite clear in the roadmap, in our various communications,
in this ml, and elsewhere that no disruptive changes are planned for the
first release. This mean no systemd by default, no python change to
python 3, likely no gnome shell by default, no lvm by default, no
rolling release, etc, etc. 

And this also includes no disruptive changes in a area like the package
manager if we can avoid it.

> Sure every one knows mageia will not
> hurry to go to rpm5 tomorrow, and so what ? If some are bored about
> some related questions, why not opening a FAQ that explain it, or that
> just point to the related archive/topic (which could be this one) ?

That's not really a FAQ when there is at most 3 persons who asked for it
( 2 being part of the upstream project ).

Michael Scherer

More information about the Mageia-dev mailing list