Once upon a time, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek(a)in.waw.pl> said:
Oh, I didn't fully understand your comment at the time. I
automatically assumed
that "enabled in production" only means that the *code* is there, i.e. that
the version of rpm has been updated in preparation. Actually enabling this
while the proposal is being discussed is definitely NOT OK. It makes
mockery of the whole Change process and deliberation on fedora-devel and
the fesco ticket.
I have to say, I didn't realize that the RPM format was being changed in
a backwards-incompatible way. I don't see that mentioned ONCE in the
change proposal, and that's a very large thing to miss.
I think that alone is enough to kill any such proposal until the
compatible versions of RPM are in widespread use. It has wide-ranging
impact - we still have "rpmbuild-md5" for back compat for example
(although that could probably be retired now; think EPEL 5 was that last
thing that needed it?). That's needed for package developers working on
multiple releases/versions; there'd need to be another back-compat
rpmbuild (at least), for example for running on a desktop of Fedora 33
but working on a package for EPEL 7.
--
Chris Adams <linux(a)cmadams.net>