How about a Smart Package Format?

[Gustavo Niemeyer]

> > 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,

Unix failed because of a multitude of reasons that have no overlap
with the issue we're discussing.

> or linux 2.2 kernel.  Open Source software *should*

The Linux 2.2 kernel is seldomly used because there are new versions
of the same operating system, just like rpm and dpkg.

> 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.     

We have two standards already: .rpm and .deb.  Why do you belive that
creating a new one would make it a defacto option, rather than just
another format?  Why would Ubuntu, Mandriva, SuSE, Debian, and RedHat
take the huge effort of migrating their package base to use it? 
What will make it better?

> If the infrastructure is there to make a better format than .deb
> or rpm, why not capitalize on that?  

So far you only mentioned that we could make something else, something
better.  Why would it be better?  Why would it be used at all?

-- 
Gustavo Niemeyer
http://niemeyer.net