On Fri, 2005-09-16 at 12:24 +0100, Gary Benson wrote: > Gary Benson wrote: > But all this is somewhat tangential to the original point, which was > that "[if] the JPackage repos are added to a FC4 yum configuration, > yum will try to overwrite [Fedora] packages with [JPackage] > packages..." Allowing the Fedora stack to be extended with JPackage > packages was and is a key requirement. There's only one way I can see > that would prevent the former while still allowing the latter, and > that's for Fedora's packages to have the same EVR as the JPackage > packages. Since that is something we cannot commit to, the problem > will remain regardless of where the native code is packaged. I'm starting to think we shouldn't support Fedora Core/JPackage pull arrangements, only Rawhide/JPackage arrangements. Fedora Core and JPackage are on different release cycles; FC tends to have "releases" whereas JPackages are continually updated individually. I think each project's release strategy makes sense for it but the two strategies are incompatible. Without FC/JPackage setups where will people get packages that are in JPackage but not in FC? I'm wondering if a JPackage -> Fedora Extras bridge is in order. Right before a Fedora release we'd do a drop from JPackage to Extras of all packages not in Core. That way FE would be a snapshot of JPackage at FC release time. That would insulate FC users from JPackage churn, while Rawhide users could continue using JPackage directly. Tom
