On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 4:02 PM, Petr Pisar <ppisar@redhat.com> wrote:

On 2013-03-29, Miloslav Trmač <mitr@volny.cz> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Petr Pisar <ppisar@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 2013-03-29, Tomas Mraz <tmraz@redhat.com> wrote:
>> Basically yes. It's call for semantically separeted API identifier. Now
>> you have NEVRA string:
>>
>> Where we have API? Nowhere because Fedora assumes only one version of
>> a package. API should work like Architecture in sense of parallel
>> instalability, but it shouls provide name spacing for EVR string. API
>> itself should define orderding to allow selecting latest package across
>> all builds as already commmentd:
>>
>
> Isn't one of the principal problems that lead to calls for transparent
> multiple version support exactly the _impossibility_ of having an API
> identifier?
>

Not only. It does not matter if upstream versions API properly or if
upstream does it at all. If you do not like `API', use `interface' or
`contract' or whatever word you like.

I guess my redefinition of the "API identifier" has confused things. So to make it simple:

"How does (yum update) work with multiple installed versions?"

We already can install simultaneously 25 different RPMs with the same %{name}. But what does (yum uprade) do when the repositories one month later contain 35 different RPMs with that name, none matching the original 25?

Has anyone been able to come up with a proposed behavior that would match users expectations in the various languages? I haven't looked, but I haven't seen one mentioned; certainly not in this thread.

Mirek