ATrpms and FC5/RHEL5

[John Ellson]

Axel Thimm wrote:
> So, is there interest to have ATrpms for FC5 less overlapping with
> core packages?
>   
Less overlap is probably a good thing.   It should at least free up some 
of your resources
for non-overlapping packages.

However, I doubt that overlaps can be completely eliminated, or that it 
is even desirable
to completely eliminate them, so I think it is more important to have a 
clear mechanism
to allow the user to control the default choice, and to be able to 
override it if desired.
 
> If so, is there any redhat.com folk that would be willing to add
> versioned obsoletes/provides to core specfiles? That's neccessary to
> ensure upgradability.
>   

Hopefully, but what can we do to minimize their effort?

John