Thoughts from last meeting

[Dennis Jacobfeuerborn]

On 05/29/2012 04:44 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Jan-Frode Myklebust <janfrode at tanso.net> said:
>> I completely agree. Secondary repo which would be disabled by default
>> holding packages that could conflict with RH-channels would be ideal for
>> our usage. It would also open up for actively including stuff that's in
>> RHEL layered products -- for unsupported usage. 
> 
> The problem with that is you'd need an ever-increasing combination of
> additional EPEL repos.  There'd be an "EPEL base" that doesn't conflict
> with any layered products (but has almost no packages), but then you'd
> need a bunch of combinations of "doesn't conflict with foo and bar but
> may conflict with baz".

I don't think "a bunch of combinations" is necessary here. Just create the
base repo and an extension repo. The base repo is conservative in that it
only carries packages that don't collide with any of the RHEL products.
The extension repo is disabled by default and by enabling it you explicitly
recognize that if its contents collide with layered products you have
installed then it's your job to deal with that. If you don't like that feel
free to only use the base repo.

Trying to specifically accomodate every possible combination of products
installed sounds way too complicated and will most likely only create a big
mess.

Regards,
  Dennis