Fostering Cooperation (was Yum and EXTRAS)

[Robin Laing]

Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-06-03 at 03:34, Andy Green wrote:
> 
> 
>>|>(The idea in the link above that the solution to multiple repos
>>|>is that there should only be one uber-repo, and that other guys should
>>|>"submit" packages for inclusion in the uber-repo is unfortunate).
>>|
>>| What makes it "unfortunate"?
>>
>>It comes over like a land-grab.  "Cooperation is
>>impossible"/submit/resistance is futile does not help.
> 
> 
> The real problem is that the 3rd party repositories (freshrpms, DAG,
> etc.) existed long before the fedora project, providing updates for
> RH versions that otherwise would have required a subscription to
> obtain automatically along with additional packages.  Then the
> fedora repository used different conventions.  If the 3rd party
> sites change conventions, their existing users will at best have to
> download everything touched again and at worst, have broken systems.

I do agree with you to a point.

But with a new release (FC4), why not support the newer version as the 
main site.  Any third party site could (should) work with the 
distribution method of the release and work as seamlessly as possible. 
  They should also try to work together as some are so they don't 
duplicate packages and/or their packages are mutually compatible.

It is a pain to install from one repository only to find that you 
cannot update from a different repository or even from the fedora core 
site.  This is one of those issues about multiple repositories that 
has burned me.  No site should require the installation of a package 
that prevents the upgrading from another site.

This is a pain for some of the site maintainers but I think for the 
benefit of the community, they would be willing to work with it.


> 
> A newer repository like livna doesn't have to worry about
> backwards compatibility or previously existing users, or keeping
> the same packages available for RH7-9 so they don't face quite
> the same problems - at least as long as none of their packages
> require modifications to core packages.
> 

Many newer packages probably wouldn't work on older distros for 
various reasons so this shouldn't be a major issue.  I know that there 
are some packages that haven't been made for FC1 (which I am still on) 
but I understand this.  Again, if a distro is new, then why not work 
towards that method.

In general, I prefer the move to Extras as it makes it easier for a 
basic install.  Then use yum or preferred method to install the 
packages wanted.

-- 
Robin Laing