F14 yum update conflict

[JD]

On 04/07/2011 11:10 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 04/07/2011 11:24 PM, JD wrote:
>> They offer rpms for apps the main fedora repo does not provide, but
>> link them with libraries and packages with a slightly different
>> build and version number than what Fedora Repo DOES provide, thus
>> breaking the dependency chain.
> It is unlikely that RPM Fusion would do that.  Most maintainers in that
> repo are Fedora maintainers.  So is the atrpms maintainer for that
> matter. You should just not mix conflicting third party repositories.
> Either use one or the other and cherry pick carefully if you must.
>
Problem is that Neither the Redhat Fedora repos, nor the other
two non-redhat fedora repos carry the same wanted apps. So
your suggestion is not feasible for people that want to use
mplayer or vlc, to name just two of the very many apps.

>> I was hoping that Redhat would lower the boom and tell these repo
>> maintainers that they cannot name their package names with the
>> fc14 (or in general fcN), if they break Redhat's fcN releases
>> dependency chains, and should not duplicate libraries in /lib and
>> /usr/lib, which Redhat Fedora already provides.
> There are no trademarks over a name like "fc" that Red Hat holds.  These
> packages don't have "Fedora" or "Red Hat' in their names and even if
> they would,  trying to claim trademark rights over package names would
> be overreaching.   I don't think a legal hammer is the solution to this
> problem
Legal or not, the three ought to coordinate not to clobber each other's
dependency chains, and version numbers, so that fedora users are
not cornered into the conundrum I and many other fedora users
find themselves. I think RH has plenty of clout to bring about such
coordination without having to resort to any legalese.

I would further suggest that redhat Fedora repo adopt the apps
that the other two repos provide, and build them within the confines
of the the RH fedora repo to eliminate this problem.

Cheers,

JD

> Rahul