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.
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.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
