On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 12:13 PM, Tomasz Kłoczko <kloczko.tom...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 28 April 2017 at 21:32, Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: >> You do keep saying that it's easy. What I'm saying is that it's easy to >> say things are easy, but... from experience, usually they are not. If >> it *is* that easy, why not make a proof of concept? In any case, taking >> them to the RPM project upstream is probably more fruitful than what >> amounts to effectively nagging people who are attempting to make >> improvements to _use_ within the existing functionality of the >> software. > > You see it is only one big hole in you logic .. IPS exist!!! > As long as you still going to refuse that IPS existence I must agree > with you that it is really hard .. however I'm not going to share your > pain because I'm using it on daily bases. > Just control question: did you ever try *one time* to have look on IPS > in meantime? > If not this conversation does not make any sense because it is like > trying to explain you taste of some dish you never been eating and > probably never going to try. > > FYI: no one working on RPM is interested extending its functionality >
There's plenty of stuff going on in rpm.org upstream. You can look for yourself: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm I've even personally contributed to it. If you feel there is missing functionality, feel free to contribute and improve it. The upstream is very active, with contributions from individuals from Red Hat/Fedora, Mageia, SUSE/openSUSE, and even from BSD and Mac users! As the saying goes: Talk is cheap! IPS may have some awesome capabilities, so why not add them to RPM? No one has ever said we can't add best of breed features to RPM. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
