FC5 and Yum Plugins

[Axel Thimm]

On Thu, Dec 29, 2005 at 06:18:00PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, den 29.12.2005, 11:50 -0500 schrieb Brian Long:
> > On Thu, 2005-12-29 at 11:28 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> > > On 12/29/05, Brian Long <brilong at cisco.com> wrote:
> > > > I would think it would be in the best interest of the Fedora team to
> > > > install protectbase by default, enable it and protect Fedora repos.  If
> > > > power users want to disable it, it's very easy.
> > > > Am I off-base in this request?  :)
> > > Have you spoken with the atrpms and freshrpms maintainers? Do you have
> > > their agreement that turning this on is in the best interest of their
> > > users? 
> > 
> > Nope.  I don't know that it's up to me or the Fedora project to contact
> > each third-party repo maintainer when Fedora implements a change.  I'm
> > asking Fedora to consider a change.  If Fedora decides to implement that
> > change for the "protection" of their users and repos, the third party
> > repos would shoot themselves in the foot if they started scripting
> > around the protection!  IMHO, they would lose credibility.
> 
> They don't override base Fedora RPMs just for fun, they afaik do it
> because some of the their packages need fixes and/or enhancements that
> are not in the base Fedora RPMs (correct me if I'm wrong here).
> 
> So if you protect the Core packages some packages in the 3rd-Party might
> not work (or not perfectly). So it probably creates more problems for
> the user and the 3rd party repo maintainer than it solves.

Exactly. Which is why any repo, be it atrpms or something else, that
does see a need to replace package foo in core, and thus has
overlapping package sets with core will not like this idiom. I have
already been hit by bug reports that stem from improper use of
priorities/weights and scores. Such filtering creates a lot more
issues and debugging problems than it solves.

> > I believe there are 2 types of 3rd party repo users:
> > 
> > 1) Fedora user who needs 3rd party repos for certain apps but never
> > wants that repo to override base Fedora RPMs
> 
> Then use a 3rd party repo that does not override Fedora Core or Extras
> RPMS. Yes, such a repo exists, but no, I still has no mythtv -- nobody
> stepped up to package it there. Any volunteers? 

What would your conclusion be if in the middle of porting these 30+
packages from ATrpms you find out that you *need* to replace packages
from core?
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- 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-devel-list/attachments/20051229/03472b83/attachment.sig>