Software Management call for RFEs

[Dan Fruehauf]

Reverting changes to files handled by RPM (or installing a single file out
of the package), for instance:
rpm -qp some-rpm.rpm --revert/--extract /etc/some-rpm.conf
/etc/another-file.conf

I know it can be done with rpm2cpio, just a suggestion to implement it
natively and extract the files to their correct location.


On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 7:52 AM, Orion Poplawski <orion at cora.nwra.com>wrote:

> On 05/22/2013 07:43 AM, Jan Zelený wrote:
>
>> Dear Fedora community,
>> several months ago, at the Developer conference in Brno, Software
>> Management
>> team received a whole bunch of proposals for new functionality in RPM and
>> related software stack.
>>
>> We acknowledge the need for some changes in Software Management stack in
>> Fedora but we don't want to make changes just by guessing what our
>> users want. Therefore I call to you, consumers of our products (dnf, yum
>> and
>> rpm): what are the changes that you would like to see in the foreseeable
>> future (say 2-3 years) and why would you like to see them (what would they
>> help you with)?
>>
>> There is already a list of some RFEs on rpm.org wiki, you can use it as
>> an
>> inspiration, to see what RFEs we have already received:
>> http://rpm.org/wiki/**FeaturePlanning<http://rpm.org/wiki/FeaturePlanning>
>>
>> The only limitation for your requests is our manifest which defines the
>> scope
>> of SW management stack for the future. It is attached to this email (note
>> that
>> it's quite extensive but the first part should give you a good image of
>> what is
>> the planned scope of SW management stack).
>>
>> Please send your requests as replies to this email so they can be properly
>> discussed.
>> After your proposals are filed and discussed, all will be evaluated by our
>> team and a roadmap with priorities will be created with those selected as
>> doable and meaningful.
>>
>> Thank you in advance for your participation
>> Jan
>>
>
>
> Something I'm just now running into - I have a package that can make use
> of one of two different backends, but it definitely needs one of them.  I
> don't want to pick which one in the package.  Also, it is explicitly
> referencing specific implementations, not a generic interface, so a generic
> Provides in the backend packages is not appropriate.  But something like:
>
> Requires: ( pkgA || pkgB )
>
> might do the trick.
>
>
> --
> Orion Poplawski
> Technical Manager                     303-415-9701 x222
> NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office             FAX: 303-415-9702
> 3380 Mitchell Lane                       orion at nwra.com
> Boulder, CO 80301                   http://www.nwra.com
>
> --
> devel mailing list
> devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.**org/mailman/listinfo/devel<https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20130523/8cbee807/attachment.html>