On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 20:11:47 -0500, James wrote: > On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 00:14 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 20:19:48 -0800, Jesse wrote: > > > > > Extras had significantly fewer packages, > > > > Well, Fedora Extras 6 (x86_64) contained 5129 packages, which is only 300 less > > than F11 stable updates. > > > > http://archive.fedoraproject.org/pub/archive/fedora/linux/extras/6/x86_64/repoview/index.html > > *sigh* No need to do that. > I almost managed to not respond to any of these threads today. > Anyway (trying to say just the facts): > > % yum repolist --releasever=11 updates > repo id repo name status > updates Fedora 11 - x86_64 - Updates 9,390 > repolist: 9,390 So what? That's not twice as much as FE6, which would not have taken several hours to push into such a repo. Not even when running repoclosure on the needsign repo prior to pushing and when updating repoview pages afterwards. Simply because the code that was used worked very differently than "mash". > ...and it's only ~65% done. That also doesn't take into account the fact > that we've released ~17k F11 updates, which I'm pretty sure didn't > happen for F6 extras. What are you trying to point out? Not everything is better or more convenient with the current push/compose infrastructure. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
