[Pulp-list] meta-packages

[Jeff Ortel]

On 09/21/2012 08:23 AM, Dennis Gregorovic wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 10:42 +0200, Stephen Benjamin wrote:
>> On Thu, 2012-09-20 at 15:26 -0500, Jeff Ortel wrote:
>>> All,
>>>
>>> As you know, pulp v2 is packaged into quite a few packages (RPMSs).  In
>>> an effort to make this more manageable for users, we decided to provide
>>> meta-packages that would bundle the platform packages + RPM support
>>> packages.  We weren't 100% convinced this was the way to go but decided
>>> to try it anyway.  After living with if for a bit, the bad taste in my
>>> mouth just hasn't gone away and, in fact, has gotten worse with the
>>> introduction of puppet support.  Nothing against the puppet support :)
>>> If we continue using the meta-packages, users would do wonky things when
>>> installing a pulp server with both RPM and puppet support.
>>>
>>> Like:
>>>
>>> # yum install pulp-rpm-server pulp-puppet-server
>>>
>>> This /seems/ like they're install two separate servers.
>>>
>>> Unless there is objection, I plan to get rid of the meta-packages under
>>> products/.  What does this mean for users?  It means that when
>>> installing pulp, users will install the platform packages + the support
>>> packages they need.  Here is what this will look like:
>>>
>>> THE PULP SERVER:
>>>
>>> # yum install pulp-server
>>>
>>> ... and for RPM support:
>>>
>>> # yum install pulp-rpm-plugins
>>>
>>> For pulp-admin:
>>>
>>> # yum install pulp-admin-client
>>>
>>> ... and for RPM support:
>>>
>>> # yum install pulp-rpm-admin-extensions
>>>
>>> In both cases, yum depsolving does most of the work.
>>>
>>> Here is the shortest version of how a user would install a pulp server +
>>> RPM support & the admin client:
>>>
>>> # yum install pulp-rpm-plugins pulp-rpm-admin-extensions
>>>
>>> Again, yum depsolving does most of the work.
>>>
>>>
>>> ON THE CONSUMER:
>>>
>>> # yum install
>>>
>>> ... and for RPM support:
>>>
>>> # yum install pulp-rpm-consumer-extensions
>>>
>>> For the agent:
>>>
>>> # yum install pulp-agent
>>>
>>> .. and for RPM support:
>>>
>>> # yum install pulp-rpm-handlers
>>>
>>> Here is the short version:
>>>
>>> # yum install pulp-rpm-consumer-extensions pulp-rpm-handlers
>>>
>>> Users can also get creative with yum wildcards.
>>>
>>> Still considering package groups in addition to this ....
>>>
>>> Thoughts, Objections?
>>
>> My first impression as an end-user of pulp is this is overly
>> complicated, why does it have to be so compartmentalized?  I don't know
>> why you should have to jump through hoops (albeit, small ones) to
>> install support for RPM repositories.  I think that "yum install
>> pulp-server" should give you a working pulp server with a set of core
>> functionality, and pulp-consumer should do the same.
>>
>> For any automation cases, like in a kickstart or in puppet/chef/cfengine
>> it's much simpler to specify one package:
>>
>> pulp-consumer
>>
>> than it would be to have this:
>>
>> pulp-consumer-client
>> pulp-rpm-consumer-extensions
>> pulp-agent
>> pulp-rpm-handlers
>>
>> Just my $0.02.
>
> In general, comps.xml groups are the preferred way to add convenience
> for installing groups of packages together.  meta-packages are useful if
> you need to specify specific package versions.  For pulp, I would
> suggest a comps.xml group.

Thanks, Dennis.  I meant to mention comps.xml groups as something we are 
considering.  One question - how do we get comps.xml groups into fedora? 
  I've looked through the package maintainer docs and can't find 
anything on this.  Can you point me to something?  Although pulp is not 
in fedora yet, we fully intend to contribute it.

>
> -- Dennis
>