<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type"> </head> <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"> On 10/11/2010 03:41 PM, Jason L Connor wrote: <blockquote cite="mid:1286826064.13550.8.camel@precision" type="cite"> <pre wrap="">Hi All, I figure I'll weigh in with my 2¢. I did initially like the idea of keeping repositories that allow package upload separate from repositories with feeds. This is mighty tempting given its simplicity. However, after reading all the arguments, Mike, Jeff, and John have had some really good points. If we do not treat feeds as authoritative, and as simply a batch source for packages, I think this introduces much greater flexibility in the pulp management model than we had before. I think I'd like to see us adopt this non-authoritative view. We should: * allow a repository to define more than one feed </pre> </blockquote> Why? This is gonna break the whole premise of exposing the repos on pulp similar to its source. Today if a repo has a feed from /content/fedora/13/ we serve it that way to clients from pulp. How do we expect to serve the same when we have multiple feeds? I dont see the point of having multiple feeds for a given repo when I can have three repos exposed the same way from pulp. <blockquote cite="mid:1286826064.13550.8.camel@precision" type="cite"> <pre wrap=""> * allow package upload to all repositories </pre> </blockquote> Again, I dont see any benefit of doing this. Do we have a proper use case to do this or are we just doing this because we can. <blockquote cite="mid:1286826064.13550.8.camel@precision" type="cite"> <pre wrap=""> * allow admin to pull content from one or more of the defined feeds </pre> </blockquote> Not sure what this means. <blockquote cite="mid:1286826064.13550.8.camel@precision" type="cite"> <pre wrap=""> * should probably change the semantics of 'sync' to 'pull' (or something similar) </pre> </blockquote> +1 <blockquote cite="mid:1286826064.13550.8.camel@precision" type="cite"> <pre wrap=""> I like this model because it's actually a super-set of the functionality we now offer and doesn't (theoretically) sound like it's a prohibitive amount of work to get it going. </pre> <pre wrap=""> <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset> _______________________________________________ Pulp-list mailing list <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Pulp-list@redhat.com">Pulp-list@redhat.com</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list">https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list</a> </pre> </blockquote> </body> </html>