Format of the RPM File
there is a standard name format.
from the link: name-version-release.architecture.rpm
added to that, they dropped to just the name on most, which hurts,
there should be a list of "required packages at the earliest supported revision" like other companies do, because this allows you to verify you have the minimum necessary. not giving that is a disservice.
added to that, as pointed out some of these are the library, not the package we should use to attain the version you want.
added to that, some of these are duplicate listings.
when i was there and a client needed this i was asked if i could expedite the process. Rick and i were able to find most in 2 weeks. wasnt perfect but it was better than they have now. they never followed up. they never finished the work.
now it is hurting me as a client.
they've been working on this for a good year before i left CA. and i've been gone what, 3 years? that means 4 years and they dont have something yet?
that's not slow, that's not caring about the clients they have.
i know the support does. why else would there be the push for people like you and, wheni was there, myself, creating and supplying items like the readers and other tools.
at this point it feels like docs just doesn't care.
maybe they need to have their pay dependent on your case load... hold 1 tenth of their pay. if you support people have the case load go up disporpotionately to the clients going up, they dont get it. if it goes down, they get extra... maybe more than 10%
that would give them a good incentive to have solid docs.