What do we think of this?

[Jesse Keating]

On Tuesday 27 March 2007 15:31:35 Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> Here's where things could get interesting -- Can we make it easy for
> third party repositories to stay informed of what dep-breaking packages
> have been built and are waiting to be pushed to the repository? 

Koji can send build notifications to any email address any user tells it to.

> Can we 
> make it easy for them to grab those packages and do a rebuild that waits
> in the wings for our push to make the new package live?

Grabbing might be a bit trickier than needsign, as the contents go into a file 
system like /mnt/koji/packages/<packagename>/<version>/<release>/<arch>/

There are repos for these packages but A) not in static locations, and B) not 
guaranteed to have the package just built in it.

Jeremy and I kicked around the idea of having a two stage like rawhide, a 
nightly tree that is potentially made installable and synced around the 
world, and then a 'current' repo that is kept current by the buildsystem for 
each given tag.  This repo can and will fluctuate during the day and may not 
always be consistant nor accurate if you try to hit it during a createrepo 
call.  But it would allow for easily getting the absolutely latest built 
packages before the nightly push.  However this only makes things harder for 
3rd party as the 'rawhide' repo is now a moving target throughout the day.

There may or may not be something like this for the updates collections, that 
a 3rd party repo could pay attention to.

>
> And most importantly, how much work do they want to put into taking the
> data we provide and turning it into something that helps them keep up to
> date?

I don't want to put a lot of specific work into this.  If the generic work 
we're doing for our own needs satisfies some of what they're doing, that's 
fine, but I'm not all that keen in putting a ton of effort into supporting 
something that doesn't fit under the Fedora umbrella either because it is A) 
illegal or B) non-free.  I especially don't want to put in effort for 
supporting another repo that is just can't be bothered with doing their 
packages within Fedora and insist on doing them externally, even if the 
software is suitable for Fedora.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/attachments/20070327/1679afba/attachment.sig>