On 03/04/2010 04:44 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On 03/05/2010 03:09 AM, Peter Jones wrote: >> >> Option two is one more repo for all "updates". Which may be well and >> good, but might also be less interesting than a more general approach. In >> #4, what I'm suggesting is essentially the possibility of a SIG having >> overlay repos for whatever distro version(s) they want; they could be >> experimental, they could be for upgrades that don't conform to a more >> strict update policy, it could be for things even *I* haven't thought of >> yet ;) >> > > Is this what you had in mind? > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JesseKeating/KojiPersonalRepos It's very similar, but not quite the same, for a couple of reasons. To wit, Jesse's proposal mostly seems to focus on the repos being somewhat transient - "Bob wants a repo to test something" - whereas I'm discussing a longer-term purpose. Also, his is on a individual level, whereas what I'm discussing would be more at a SIG level. That in some sense may make implementation somewhat easier, by putting a damper on the rate at which they need to be created and destroyed, and also might include some oversight as to whether creating it is really such a good idea - but making it a "is this completely bogus" sort of choice, rather than a "does this fit in to our rigorous policies" kind of decision. This would also help avoid the option-overload that comes with #3 on my original example list. -- Peter Old MacDonald had an agricultural real-estate tax abatement. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
