On Wed, Dec 02, 2009 at 11:06:22AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > 1) Composing a new everything tree for updates would lead to larger > compose times. That could possibly mean that getting updates out would > take > 1 day per 'push'. We've been trying to improve updates push > times so it would be a bit detrimental to that goal. > This might be a good opportunity to look at some way of pushing incremental sets of packages rather than re-building the entire yum repo each time. Mashing is not a cheap operation. > 2) There might be GPL compliance issues > > 3) You would still need an 'updates-testing' repository given that this > is a supposedly stable release. So there is still going to be at least > one additional repo regardless. > We have tags for updates that mark them as bugfix/feature/security. Maybe we could have one for "testing" which would keep yum from installing the package unless explicitly asked or specially configured. > However, other than 'browsing manually for packages', I'm not really > sure what problem you are trying to solve by getting rid of the > updates repository. It would seem like this has quite a bit of cost > for relatively little to no real gain? > This is true. I don't know that manual package browsing is a use case we've ever been interested in, and if we're going to be interested in it there's probably a better way (search engine in the Fedora community portal comes to mind). > josh You owe me $5. --CJD -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
