Boston FUDCon 2006

Rahul Sundaram sundaram at redhat.com
Wed Nov 23 21:36:52 UTC 2005


Hi

>Well this is a decision I have been struggling with, and I would hope a
>steering committee would help with this.  Because we aren't Core, and we
>aren't Extras, there is some risk using our packages, some cases where
>an update may go out that causes problems that aren't caught by normal
>QA.  However there is the same risk w/ Extras and Core too.  One
>argument is that it would be one less repo that is checked for each yum
>action (or each yum action after the cache timeout).  It would also add
>load to the master download server.  We have a large number of mirrors,
>however I'm not entirely pleased with the way that mirrorlists work in
>yum.  Far too often a user in West USA may get handed a mirror in Russia
>or France or something.
>
>  
>
I would like the rationales behind the decisions to be made transparent 
for the community either way.  If its about performance of yum, I see a 
mention about "fastest mirror routine" support to yumex on 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/173708. Yum has a fastestmirror plugin as 
part yum-utils in Fedora Extras.  Not sure how good that would be 
include by default. Seth?

Also yum recently seems to have gotten better cache support.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/173708

Better mirror management on the server side seems to be on the plate too 
as part of FAIP

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora

>I guess the long/short of it is that the decision to enable/disable by
>default is up in the air.  With Pup there is a pretty easy interface to
>enable/disable repositories so changing state shouldn't be that
>difficult.
>
>  
>
Fedora Legacy users are probably server side. Pup doesnt usually help there.

>As it stands right now, I do believe I"m waiting for RH Legal to give go
>ahead to even ship a repo file that points to Legacy content.  If they
>say no, everything above is rather moot.
>
>  
>
Ok.

regards
Rahul




More information about the Fedora-marketing-list mailing list