On 10/09/2015 05:20 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Orion Poplawski wrote:Perhaps every product should produce a os/{repodata,Packages} directory as well as an updates/VERSION/PRODUCT/ tree with .Please no! Let's not fragment Fedora even more than it already is with those "products". * Would packages belonging to multiple products (kernel, glibc, glib2, systemd, NetworkManager etc.) be copied into each of those repositories?
yes, via hard links
* Where would packages that belong to a non-"product" spin (e.g. KDE) go in that plan? Into Workstation? Into a "nonproduct" dumping ground? Neither is really an ideal situation. If neither, then we are actually talking about a repository per spin, which means a dozen repositories with significant overlap.
Well, that's essentially what we have now with the Everything repo and the whole "updates" repo.
* And what about niche packages not clearly associated to any "product"? Would those also end up in a "nonproduct" dumping ground that is not enabled by default on any "product"? I think there is a lot of value in having a common repository that ensures interoperability to the maximum possible extent. Even Ubuntu with their separately marketed products (Kubuntu even being released by a separate company these days) draws from a shared repository. Let's not throw this away.
I'm not suggesting getting rid of the the everything and full updates repos. But maybe some focused products would benefit from a smaller repo set. I'm also just tossing out the idea - I personally don't have any need for it.
-- Orion Poplawski Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222 NWRA/CoRA Division FAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane orion@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Boulder, CO 80301 http://www.cora.nwra.com -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
