On Thu, Dec 29, 2005 at 06:18:00PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Donnerstag, den 29.12.2005, 11:50 -0500 schrieb Brian Long: > > On Thu, 2005-12-29 at 11:28 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > > > On 12/29/05, Brian Long <brilong@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > I would think it would be in the best interest of the Fedora team to > > > > install protectbase by default, enable it and protect Fedora repos. If > > > > power users want to disable it, it's very easy. > > > > Am I off-base in this request? :) > > > Have you spoken with the atrpms and freshrpms maintainers? Do you have > > > their agreement that turning this on is in the best interest of their > > > users? > > > > Nope. I don't know that it's up to me or the Fedora project to contact > > each third-party repo maintainer when Fedora implements a change. I'm > > asking Fedora to consider a change. If Fedora decides to implement that > > change for the "protection" of their users and repos, the third party > > repos would shoot themselves in the foot if they started scripting > > around the protection! IMHO, they would lose credibility. > > They don't override base Fedora RPMs just for fun, they afaik do it > because some of the their packages need fixes and/or enhancements that > are not in the base Fedora RPMs (correct me if I'm wrong here). > > So if you protect the Core packages some packages in the 3rd-Party might > not work (or not perfectly). So it probably creates more problems for > the user and the 3rd party repo maintainer than it solves. Exactly. Which is why any repo, be it atrpms or something else, that does see a need to replace package foo in core, and thus has overlapping package sets with core will not like this idiom. I have already been hit by bug reports that stem from improper use of priorities/weights and scores. Such filtering creates a lot more issues and debugging problems than it solves. > > I believe there are 2 types of 3rd party repo users: > > > > 1) Fedora user who needs 3rd party repos for certain apps but never > > wants that repo to override base Fedora RPMs > > Then use a 3rd party repo that does not override Fedora Core or Extras > RPMS. Yes, such a repo exists, but no, I still has no mythtv -- nobody > stepped up to package it there. Any volunteers? What would your conclusion be if in the middle of porting these 30+ packages from ATrpms you find out that you *need* to replace packages from core? -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpSTN53QGJyB.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
