Re: Where we are and where do we what to go?
On 10.02.2009 11:48, Dan Horák wrote:
Thorsten Leemhuis píše v Út 10. 02. 2009 v 10:14 +0100:
> On 10.02.2009 09:57, Dan Horák wrote:
>> Thorsten Leemhuis píše v Po 09. 02. 2009 v 19:58 +0100:
>>> On 09.02.2009 14:28, Dan Horák wrote:
>>>> Thorsten Leemhuis píše v Ne 08. 02. 2009 v 10:06 +0100:
>>>>> On 04.02.2009 14:24, Rex Dieter wrote:
>>>>>> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
[...]
>> When there should be multiple repos, then I would prefer to divide them
>> by relation to Fedora/RPM Fusion (eg. experimental, backports) rather
>> then by area (kde, mono, math, ...)
> A dedicated "math" repo like really is not needed -- those packages are
> likely more suitable for a general experimental and/or staging repo. But
> I guess some sort of spits by area will be needed -- I guess that (for
> example) the kde-redhat users likely don't want to get highly
> experimental graphics drivers from the same repo when they run yum-update.
> repo files are likely way to complicated...
I should have known it will be complicated, but let's try to categorize
the possible stuff:
Not sure yet if I like that scheme. But I'm not even sure if I fully
understand it yet.
- new packages => no conflicts with Fedora/RPM Fusion => 2
repos (stable
+ testing), stable enabled by default
You mean the normal free and nonfree repos we already have?
Side note: Should we split free and nonfree for those experimental areas
as well? I tend to say "no", as that might complicate things to much
(CVS, pushing, configuration for users, yum overhead, ...) .
- existing packages
- experimental
- examples: codeblocks
/me tries to get the example
Ahh, codeblocks is one of you Fedora packages!
/me thinks he got it now
- backports
- examples:
- forwardports (new stable versions from Fedora into EL)
- examples: zabbix (no rebase 1.4->1.6 planned due DB
changes etc, but some users would appreciate to have
the 1.6)
- one repo for each category, disabled by default, user
must manually enable the repo and pick the package he
want to install or update
Does the user actually care if it's a back- or forwardport? I'd say "not
really".
- special cases like kde-redhat - 2 repos (again stable +
testing) per case, stable enabled by default
Rex, would you actually need "stable" and "testing" repos or could
this
work without "testing"?
Does this sound feasible?
As I said, not sure yet. I'll think about it for a while longer ;-)
Cu
knurd