On Wed, 03 Aug 2005 10:11:31 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote: > the livna repository not only 'plays > nice' with the official core/extra repositories but it requires you > to use them because packages that exist in core/extras aren't duplicated > at livna and are often dependencies in the livna packages. Primarily, this is due to resource problems. The combination of Fedora Extras and Fedora Core is seen as an extended base repository. What is in Core and Extras already, doesn't need to be maintained separately. However, it's not that easy, as sometimes packages may have build requirements, which are newer than what is found in Core or Extras. Think CVS snapshots or bleeding edge releases, which somebody at livna.org would like to package because of major bug fixes or feature improvements. Even if the package developer at Extras were asked, it may not be easily feasible to upgrade something in Extras only because an external repository needs a newer version. > I'm not > quite sure why the other 3rd party repositories don't work that way > too. I understand it with earlier releases where there are > compatibility problems with pre-existing packages, but at this point > what justification is there for anyone to build a package that > conflicts with core/extras? Well, there are several reasons, some known, some not. For instance, not all 3rd party repos have the same goal. Packages in Extras may not build for Red Hat Enterprise Linux. This would require extra effort, when binary packages for multiple distributions are built from the same src.rpm. Then, imagine a repo maintainer starts with 30 extra packages. Do you want him to remove a package from his repository when the same software is packaged in Extras by somebody else? Some independent packagers don't like to rely on infrastructure or procedures/policies, which they consider inferior to their own way of doing package releases, As I don't want to pour gasoline into the [still] smouldering fire, no comment on other reasons.
