On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
Add to that the implicit problem of two(or more) disconnected repositories.
When we push updates in Fedora, we can and do break deps in the 3rd party
repos. They have to rebuild against what we're publishing as updates before
their deps are fixed. For OUR repos, we can prepare all these builds before
pushing live so that the repos stay consistant. External parties do not have
this luxury. And I'm not about to run repoclosure on N+ 3rd party repos
before pushing out an update.
Here's where things could get interesting -- Can we make it easy for
third party repositories to stay informed of what dep-breaking packages
have been built and are waiting to be pushed to the repository? Can we
make it easy for them to grab those packages and do a rebuild that waits
in the wings for our push to make the new package live?
And most importantly, how much work do they want to put into taking the
data we provide and turning it into something that helps them keep up to
date?
+1. Because here's the thing: I think that, all things being equal, the
3rd party repos would really prefer *not* breaking us or bring broken
themselves.
Right now, we point our fingers at 3rd party repos and say "their fault".
Surely no one is actually happy with that scenario. Surely everyone would
be amenable to looking for solutions.
--g
-------------------------------------------------------------
Greg DeKoenigsberg || Fedora Project || fedoraproject.org
Be an Ambassador || http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ambassadors
-------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
