On 9. 4. 2013 at 12:25:56, seth vidal wrote: > On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 11:18:54 -0500 > > Bruno Wolff III <bruno@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 00:05:45 +0800, > > > > Mathieu Bridon <bochecha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >The current behaviour would be obtained by setting it to 1, and > > >setting it to 2 would already be a positive change as it would allow > > >downgrading a package if the update went wrong. > > > > I don't think that is really what you want either. The idea is to > > keep recently obsoleted updates around, not 2 or 3 versions of > > everything. > > > > The change has some other benefits. Reverting bad updates in rawhide > > would be easier. You can use yum downgrade instead of having to going > > look at koji and download builds. Dealing with packages dropping out > > of repos when moving between test and updates. The latter issue is > > especially bad with branched during freezes. > > So - this is just an idea - and not necessarily a good one - but what > about moving older pkgs which are not in the initial release repo into > an updates-archive repo. > > We could leave the repo disabled by default and only keep 2 copies of > any single pkg name in the repo at a time. > > That way in the best of all possible worlds you'd have at most 4 copies > of a pkg in total: > 1 - in the base release 'everything' repo > 1 - in updates > 2 - in updates-archive I'm not sure this solves the initial problem - downloading new metadata every 6 hours or so ... -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
