We shouldn't disqualify something just because it's "that something" (: They're being excluded not because they have relation to "debs and rpms", but because they fall in the same paradigm as tools like yaourt, well somewhat at least. We already have - for administrative purposes - rpmextract and checkinstall.
Wow, this one's received a lot of attention in such a short time. Infamous is the word, hate is the subject?
On 06/04/2008, Loui <louipc.ist@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 18:45:07 +1000
Allan McRae <mcrae_allan@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Hi TU's,
>
> I was wondering what peoples opinions are about putting rpm/dpkg in
> [community]. They both have a descent number of votes (27 & 33) so
> people obviously find them useful. Does anyone have objections about
> their "unArchness" (it is a real word, honest!)? It is what has stopped
> me moving dpkg so far...
Hi. I'm not a TU but can I state my opinion too?
I would say NO. A resounding unequivocal NO to rpm and dpkg.
Heh. I even have objections about them being in [unsupported].
Sorry if I interrupted the conversation, but I couldn't resist.
Cheers.