[Pulp-list] Handling Uploads to repos with feed

[Mike McCune]

On 10/11/2010 10:20 AM, Jeff Ortel wrote:
>
>
> On 10/11/2010 10:17 AM, Pradeep Kilambi wrote:
>> Should we allow the case where, user creates a repo with a feed, syncs
>> down the content and then tries to upload additional content to the same
>> repo?
>>
>> Pros:
>>
>> * A user probably will have an easy time adding custom content to their
>> repos without having to create new repos
>>
>> Cons:
>>
>> * We need to regenerate metadata for the repo. Today we get the metadata
>> for repos with feed directly from the feed.
>> * Will need to worry about what version of RHEL/Fedora pulp is running
>> on for compatible yum metadata.
>> * For Red Hat repos, we probably dont want to allow this anyway. So
>> we'll need some extra rules to bypass this.
>>
>> Overall seems like keeping uploads separate from feed repos is cleaner.
>> User can always create a new repo, upload content and subscribe to both
>> repos to get that additional content.
>
> Agreed, we should keep them separate.
>
> Also, we discussed (in imanage) supporting repos which extend other repos.  If we still
> intend to do this, then users can easily create a repo with no feed that extends a repo
> that does have a feed.  This mitigates the need to subscribe to both repos.
>

I still don't see why it is all that different than what we have now 
with the addition of the need to run createrepo --update after a sync 
like we do now after a package upload ...

Is there something more than that?

Mike