IMHO that isn&#39;t enough of a warrant for it to be in [community]. If we want to take into consideration such a reasoning, then akin to what danimoth mentioned, we should see a few other tools in the repo too. Furthermore, 27 and 33&nbsp;only barely pass as &quot;popular&quot;.<br>
<br>Well in any case, if  a TU wants, he gets.<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 06/04/2008, <b class="gmail_sendername">RedShift</b> &lt;<a href="mailto:redshift@pandora.be">redshift@pandora.be</a>&gt; wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin-top: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-left: 0.80ex; border-left-color: #cccccc; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid; padding-left: 1ex">
<div><span class="e" id="q_11922f97cb8d198b_0">Allan McRae wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left-color: #cccccc; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid; padding-left: 1ex"> Hi TU&#39;s,<br>
<br> I was wondering what peoples opinions are about putting rpm/dpkg in [community]. &nbsp;They both have a descent number of votes (27 &amp; 33) so people obviously find them useful. &nbsp;Does anyone have objections about their &quot;unArchness&quot; (it is a real word, honest!)? &nbsp;It is what has stopped me moving dpkg so far...<br>
<br> Allan<br><br><br></blockquote><br></span></div> As far as I am concerned, rpm, dpkg, etc... are just pieces of software. I see no reason why they shouldn&#39;t be included in community. It would even be an advantage, you could install distributions that use dpkg or rpm from Arch Linux.<br>
<br> Glenn<br><br><br></blockquote></div><br>