On 16. 3. 2015 at 15:52:10, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > = Proposed Self Contained Change: Disabled Repositories Support = > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DisabledRepoSupport > > Change owner(s): Richard Hughes <rhughes at redhat dot com> > > The Software tool and PackageKit now support disabled repositories to help > users locate software in additional repositories which are not meant to be > enabled by default. > > * This Change is announced after the Change Submission Deadline as an > exception to the process. May not be approved for proposed Fedora release. * > > == Detailed Description == > This feature aims to reduce the technical hurdles for users and developers > to locate software packaged for a distribution, but which needs to be > clearly identified as not officially included (or possibly sanctioned) by > that distribution. > > When Software (via PackageKit) queries a repo definition that contains the > line enabled_metadata=1, even if the repo is disabled, it will download > repodata. This feature allows a user to locate software in response to a > search. If the user wants to install the software, she receives a dialog > with information that the repo must be enabled to satisfy the request, and > if relevant, information about the nature of the software (for instance, if > it is non- libre). > > N.B. This feature does not currently operate in Fedora, since no such repo > definitions are currently shipped. However, the feature could be used by > remixers, and in the future in Fedora in the event of a policy change. > > == Scope == > * Proposal owners: Include enhancements in gnome-software/PackageKit (done) > * Other developers: N/A (not a System Wide Change) > * Release engineering: N/A (not a System Wide Change) > ** Note: For this feature to be used in Fedora requires an additional *- > release-extra package to ship disabled repo definition > * Policies and guidelines: N/A (not a System Wide Change) > ** Note: For this feature to be used in Fedora requires clearer approval > from FESCo and the Council I wonder, are there any implications for dnf in terms of being consistent with the new behavior of Gnome Software? I realize that people using dnf have more options than people using Gnome Software (--enablerepo for instance) but this sounds like the beginning of the end of disabled repositories. Personally, I don't like the semantics of these semi-disabled repos. It beats the purpose of disabling the repos in the first place, doesn't it? I mean I don't get why user would specify enabled_metadata=1 when he can achieve almost the same result with disabled=0 (the only difference I can see is one additional popup dialog). Or is there something I'm missing? Thanks Jan -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
