Hello,

I'm more or less new to this list, but tried to study the WIKI and the list-archive before issuing this proposal/questions:

-----------------------------------------------------------------

1. Enhance Release Tag:

At the moment, the release-tag is automatically created as: Release = <SPEC-Version>.<Rebuild> Good.

I propose, to be able to add an additional "tag" to the release, so that different packagers can be differentiated more easily by the filename of the package.

Example: "xyz" and "mge" are both working on packages for "iozone". By accident, both reach build-level "3.42".

An rpm-name of iozone-3.263-3.42.xyz.src.rpm iozone-3.263-3.42.mge.src.rpm is much better in this case.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

2. Add "distribution" to rpm-filename

I know, that this is a somehow religious discussion, but I also know, that some people are used to do this, e.g. Pascal Bleser:

I propose, to add a short-name of the distribution to each binary (or noarch) RPM, i.e. all RPMs but the src-RPMs.

Examples:

iozone-3.263-3.42.mge.sles09.x86_64.rpm iozone-3.263-3.42.mge.sles10.x86_64.rpm iozone-3.263-3.42.mge.src.rpm

There is no need, to tweak the SPEC-files, if using something like this in "~/.rpmmacros" (or wherever):

%TargetOS sles10 %_rpmfilename %%%{ARCH}/%{NAME}-%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}.%{TargetOS}.%{ARCH}.rpm

I agree, that this is not necessary, if one uses only yum or the like for updating a machine; but it becomes necessary, if you "by accident" have a mixed local storage. (And "by accident" happens, when you do not expect it, ...:-<)

-----------------------------------------------------------------

3. The empty packager-tag is beeing worked on, as I read.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

4. "Distribution"

I did not find any information, how the "Distribution" will be look like. I guess, there are three options:

a) something "generic", like: "openSUSE.org BuildService" b) the corresponding distribution Tag, e.g. "SuSE SLES-9 (i586)" c) free text

Is there a proposal / decision for that?

IMHO, "b)" would be bad, as it would make no difference between offical $vendor-packages and BuildService packages, ...

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for listening - so long - MgE