How about a Smart Package Format?

[Jerry Haltom]

How, curiously, would you make a better archive format than .deb? Start
explaining what you would actually change. .deb is the best. According
to me anyways.

What needs to be improved upon?

On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 16:50 -0600, Joseph Smidt wrote:
> > Smart has a lot of the infrastructure needed to replace them, but
> > the main question is: why?  why would it help at all to introduce
> > yet another format?  In the end, a package format is only useful
> 
> For the same reason practically nobody uses the original version of unix anymore, or linux 2.2 kernel.  Open Source software *should* continually evolve and get better.  Especially in the ability to become more universal.  Of course people should be able to use whatever package management tool they wish, or format for that matter, but I really think it would be beneficial if there was a standard everyone could turn to if they wanted.  One which on one hand was a universal standard, and on the other hand was more advanced then what has hitherto been released.  I think the open source community would be benefited by that.     
> 	If the infrastructure is there to make a better format than .deb
> or rpm, why not capitalize on that?  
> 
>                          Joseph Smidt 
>