On Wed, 2005-07-27 at 13:42 -0700, Karsten Wade wrote: > On Wed, 2005-07-27 at 08:21 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: > > On Wed, 2005-07-27 at 11:58 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote: > > > > > > I always replace the repositories given in the default entries > > > by local repositories (I mean in Ireland, in my case). > > > I don't know if that is standard practice. > > > > It's not, since the default entries are to mirror lists and not single > > sites. Your package requests go to a random mirror entry, meaning > > there's a basic and large-scale load balancing that happens without you > > having to do anything. What happens otherwise if your local repo is > > down? > > I wonder if the idea of having repositories package their .repo and > other files in an RPM is going to take hold? As long as the Core and > Extras repositories do that, we can use them as an example in such a way > that users understand they can do the same with a repo package from > their favorite outside repository. > > Keeping our focus on *only* what ships in Core and Extras makes our jobs > both easier and hard. The old rule that, "When the only tool you have > is a hammer, suddenly every problem looks like a nail," that can happen > to us. However, it is awfully nice to have a scope. Strangely, the other day I was thinking about another cautionary axiom for the FOSS world, which is "Even if you just discovered a toolbox full of fizzgigs, hoojybodgies and whatsits, sometimes the nail pops need to be addressed first. Use the hammer for that." I hope that my admitting this isn't somehow undermining your point; I just had to get it off my chest. > This is my way of saying that I concur with Paul's assessment about > discussing with outside repositories. > > One way to be helpful could be, if we had an FAQ with a question that > would have an answer of, "Don't cross the repository streams," we can > just tell people that if they are using non-Core or Extras repositories, > they may have conflicts between packages in those files, yadda yadda > yadda. Since Extras became fully open to community participation, there's a lot fewer problems with repository conflicts. Most of the third-party repos have tended to drop things that are appearing in Extras, meaning that most conflicts occur between different third-party repos. A few of them are consolidating to address the problem. Some claim there is no problem. Some are correct. Since so many of them are offering legally encumbered solutions, it's a touchy situation for us to address. Telling people "don't cross the repo streams" (I like this one!) may not be as accurate as "don't cross *certain* repo streams," but we need to stay out of that morass AFAIC. -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Documentation Project: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-docs-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
