Re: [PATCH] Do not show disabled repos.

[Chris Lumens <clumens redhat com>]

> > I don't think we should be making this change, at least at this point in time.
> 
> The reason we're making it now is because the behavior didn't become
> apparent until /after/ we killed betanag, and since that was extremely
> late in the cycle we have to fix things extremely late in the cycle.

Except we've been doing it this way since way back in July, and I am
fairly certain either you or Jeremy brought it to my attention which is
why I went ahead and made the change to include betanag in the picture.
I did it fully aware of what was going to happen.

> Perhaps next time it would be prudent to do a test build in the "final
> format" prior to this point in the schedule.

Yes, absolutely.

> I'm not going to remove the rawhide repo from the fedora-release, it's
> how people get moved to rawhide when they want to make that jump.  If
> you want to work out some way to filter rawhide like repos at
> buildinstall time, have at it I guess.  It would be interesting to see
> how this could be done in a non-Fedora specific kind of way.

No, no lists of repos to filter on.  We had that in
installclasses/fedora.py and getting rid of static repo lists was one of
the big changes in my stage2 stuff.

> I honestly don't see why the line has to be at "show me every
> repo" (except for the ones that have -debuginfo or -source in the
> name...) instead of "show me the repos that would be enabled by default
> post-install" which seems to me to be a much safer set to offer the
> user.

I didn't really like taking the -source or -debuginfo repos out either,
but those seem to be pretty universally shunned anyway so I suppose
there was precedence there.

And I doubt that having rawhide as an option as well is really all that
much safer than things like DVD+updates.  How much testing or work did
we do on that this time around?  Because I know I didn't do very much.

- Chris