On Mon, Aug 08, 2005 at 06:08:15PM +0200, Peter Boy wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 07.08.2005, 12:07 +0200 schrieb Axel Thimm:
> > > A first step might be to differentiate your repo in atrpms/extra and
> > > atrpm/addon, where the later contains packages which require a
> > > replacement of core packages and those replacement packages.
> >
> > Why?
>
> Simple for consistency! RH introduced several types of repos as part of
> the principles of the Fedora Project. Repos, which produce packages for
> the Fedora Project, should simply follow these guidelines as close as
> possible.
And FWIW ATrpms perfectly fits into that set of definitions. Check out
"Third Party" repository in Fedora's terminology. If you are thinking
about the old discussion on splitting repos into Fedora Extras and
Fedora Alternatives setups, then note that the latter was even scraped
from the terminology page.
So if you want to place 3rd party repos into a Fedora category there
is only "Third Party" left. I.e. your argument of consistency is
reversed!
> > Not to mention that others request to split of "alternatives" repos,
> > others "patent-encoumbered" ones and so one. So at the end, you will
> > have "extras", "alternatives", "add-ons", "non-us" and this times
> > three for the stability classes.
>
> No, you will end up with repos defined by the Fedora Project guidelines.
The guidelines were more or less rejected by the community (they
weren't crafted by the community, remember. And when asked on who
wrote them down, noone even stepped foreward). Only Fedora Legacy fits
with its original definition (and Core obviously).
Check out the Fedora Extras definition. It was really intended to be
for 3rd party repos:
"Fedora Extras" is a category that applies to multiple
repositories. For example, someone might wish to build a set of
packages for high performance computing use and call it "Fedora
Extras HPC"; it would be one of the Fedora Extras.
After half a year (or more) fedora.us decided to pick up that
placeholder for the merger (which was a wise move). But that was not
the terminology's intent, which is still pointing to the old
definition.
And Fedora Alternatives was a dead-born and finally after rotting 2
years on the terminology page was brought to the morgue. May it rest
in peace.
So much about consistency with top-down given guidelines/
terminology. Before giving out guidelines to the community one has to
actually analyse and understand what the community is doing. Not to
mention to work out the proposed concepts with it. ...
--
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgph2QUS0PueS.pgp
Description: PGP signature
