Luca Berra a écrit :
On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 11:06:36PM +0100, Romain d'Alverny wrote:
For instance:
* instead of having a single maintainer for a given package, have
several maintainers (with an admin maybe) over a given package (easy);
yes please
* should there be groups of packages defined? (this adds/replicates
some logic that may already be somewhere else)
this can be useful, many desktop environments consist of more than one
core package and development/packaging should be coordinated, so it
makes sense.
* should there be explicity groups of maintainers? or implicit (as
made of people maintaining the same package)?
i think explicit
L.
We could have a structure something like this :
Primary key : name of package
Other fields, 1:1 relation :
- package rpm category (+ subcategory, if any)
- repository
- etc
Other fields, 1:N relation :
- Packager nickname + packager status (primary maintainer, trainee or
whatever) + real name + email
(The last 2 items could be in a separate table keyed by nickname.)
- Package dependancies (names of other packages)
- Package provides (names of other packages)
- etc.
Any of above fields could be chosen as secondary keys.
This is just a quick suggestion, for the purposes of discussion.
It doesn't seem that this sort of info would be useful in
mageia-app-db, which is primarily for end-users.
another 2 cents :)
André
