Proposal for final repolayout

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

Sorry, still a bit in "was on vacation and there are lots of mails to
answer" mode...

On 20.06.2007 20:14, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jun 2007 14:45:52 +0200
> fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
> [...]
>> Please ignore the "rolling" stuff as well; it seems some people would
>> like to have a more "Fedora Extras" like EPEL with a bold update
>> policy (always latest and greatest). I'd like to leave the path for
>> this open in the long term, that why I'd say we should put the
>> current EPEL stuff below "stable".
> I think this adds to confusion...

Yes, it's a bit more confusion, but I more and more tend to think it's
worth the trouble, as some people for some purposes want latest and
greatest. And it seems to me some contributors would like that as well.

With a proper yum plugin we maybe in the long term might be able to say
"use RHEL and EPEL-stable repo, but get foo and it's deps from EPEL-rolling"

> I thought we had determined that EPEL
> was going to target more 'stable' type update methods? 

That's what the normal repo would be for.

> Folks wanting a really fast a furious update should use another repo
> that does that, or perhaps they could always have updates-testing
> enabled (although that might not be fast enough for them). 

We defined that the testing dir becomes the next stable when RH ships
the next quarterly update. So you can't push foo-2.0 there if you don#t
want that in EPEL-stable in the long term.

>> How to realize the layout: have two different plague-targets per
>> release; the default target is "testing/(release())"; that repo
>> becomes the stable release automatically when RH ships a new
>> quarterly update. If you want to get something into the stable repo
>> for the current release use a special build target, from which the
>> extras-push-scripts push into the proper dir directly.
> Humm... that might work. I don't know enough of how the push scripts
> work currently. perhaps Dgilmore could comment?

Dglimore?

here it is in other words:


Define different plague targets; e.g. EPEL5-stable and EPEL5-testing;
configure different targets for the push scripts. The everything build
for EPEL5-testing could land into testing/ and EPEL5-stable in the
proper dir. Testing then could manually be moved to stable on update
(e.g. 5.1). But there is no way to move something from testing to stable
that way. So if you want something in stable tested first you'd need to
build it for testing first, and for stable again later. Not nice, but
could work.


>> Comments?
> All sounds good except I would skip the 'stable/rolling' dirs. 

I'd just like to leave that path open for the long term.

CU
thl