Hmm, I think you're off on two points.
- RPM has a huge install base and is widely supported by many vendors and developers. Switching is not cost-effective. RPM is one of the major standards (the other being .deb), and you can't simply drop it.
- RPM has a big acceptance among users and developers. Forcing them to change is not possible or desirable.
- RPM does have a huge install base. Cost-effectiveness is not relevant, nor is it easily judged or dismissed. Perhaps it is most cost effective to switch now, and find a proper solution. (I've personally had a hankering for a totally new filesystem (not internal filesystem structure), along the lines of NTFS, or Be's filesystem). RPM is one of the major standards. But I disagree: Yes, we can just drop it. I "just drop things" everyday, so does everyone else. I think what you mean is it would be ill-advised to lose the crudulity of the RPM name?
-"RPM does have big acceptance among end users. They cannot be forced to change." Linux (formerly) did not have big acceptance among end users (hehe, arguably still does not, but its rising, moot point), I was not forced to use it, I do. Point is: so what you can't force people to abandon RPMs, you don't need to force them.
I'd just like to find a way to put together a Correct packaging system, rather than another layer of patching on the current system. (Although It seems that the tendency for "correct" reimplementation is not terribly high, although it does take place).