repotags (was Re: EPEL report 2007, week 19)

Sun May 20 13:19:50 UTC 2007

On 18.05.2007 20:02, Axel Thimm wrote:
> On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 09:50:09AM -0700, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
> [...]
> fpc had signaled that they would
> pass any decision of epel to introduce repotags

Hmm, I got different signals from Spot, which leads the Fedora Packaging
Committee.

See:

https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01393.html

Quoting
----
But I'd like to point out that I'm still fundamentally opposed to the
repotag, as I've yet to hear what problem it solves, aside from the
"other repos want it" problem.

~spot
--

And below is something from #fedora-devel from some weeks ago after I
send
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-April/msg01232.html

----
14:59 <       knurd> | rdieter, spot, @FPC -- will you talk about the
repotag issue in todays meeting?
14:59 <        spot> | knurd: if someone submits a draft.
15:00 <       knurd> | spot, well, you seem to be still opposed to the idea
15:00 <        spot> | http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Committee
15:01 <        spot> | not to be rude, but, you proposed "lets do repotags!"
15:01 <        spot> | i'm far far more interested in "what problem are
we trying to solve?"
15:02 <        spot> | daniel_hozac: no, that's the disttag
15:02 <     rdieter> | spot: the problem is clear (hopefully not
debatable): same pkg in multiple repos.
15:02 <       knurd> | spot, I only try to solve the problem "outside
people yell at EPEL and are makeing it look bad because it doesn't use
repotags"
15:02 <        spot> | rdieter: so, repotag doesn't really solve that
problem.
15:02 < daniel_hoza> | spot: but it's also the repotag for all Fedora
packages?
15:02 <       knurd> | spot, one of them is in FPC
15:02 <       knurd> | spot, so all I want is politics
15:03 <     rdieter> | spot: agreed, but it helps.  it's not 100% a
technical issue either (far from it). sigh.
15:04 <        spot> | rdieter: i'm not sure that it helps. if
foo-1.0.0-1.epel trumps foo-1.0.0-1.rf ... won't rf get mad?
15:05 <       knurd> | spot, .rf is higher then .epel
15:05 <     rdieter> | spot: repotag trumping is better than identical
EVR's.
15:05 <        spot> | rdieter: i suppose that depends on which repo you
wanted that package to come from
15:07 <        spot> | i'm not sure if adding them is harmless
15:07 <        spot> | it complicates release ordering
15:08 <        spot> | and n-v-r comparison
15:08 <        spot> | and adds hacks to the buildsystem
15:08 <       knurd> | spot, or spec files
15:08 <     rdieter> | spot: if adding repotag to the end of Release
causes problems, it is only exposing problems that already existed.
15:08 <        spot> | rdieter: no, its exposing problems i
intentionally avoided when i wrote the first naming drafts
15:09 <        spot> | i didn't want any unnecessary non-numeric
characters in the n-v-r
15:09 <        spot> | the repotag is "unnecessary non-numeric characters"
15:09 <       knurd> | spot, +1
15:10 <        spot> | so far, the only technical reason I've heard is
that it helps us mix repos, which we're not trying to do anyways,
because our tools don't help us mix
 these repos with or without repotags
15:10 <        spot> | which leaves us with political reasons, in that
the other 3rd party RHEL repos want us to do it.
15:11 <        spot> | the only way I can see supporting repotags in the
FPC is part of a much broader agreement between EPEL and the other repos
15:12 <        spot> | to collaborate and focus on supporting mixing the
repos.
15:12 <       knurd> | spot, that would mean Fedora probably as well
15:12 <       knurd> | spot, why only EPEL then
15:12 <        spot> | if all the repos say "mixing is our goal. we will
do X and Y and Z to make sure that users don't have pain."
15:12 <        spot> | knurd: because as Dag and Karambir told me, they
don't care about Fedora.
15:13 <        spot> | they don't do new packages for Fedora anymore
15:13 <       knurd> | spot, but others do
15:13 <        spot> | knurd: afaik, atrpms is the only one of
significant size
15:13 <        spot> | other than dribble/livna, which already have
mixing as a marked goal
15:14 <       knurd> | spot, and dries, which is part of rpmforge:
http://ftp.belnet.be/packages/dries.ulyssis.org/fedora/fc6/i386/RPMS.dries/
15:30 <        spot> | rdieter: ok, thanks.
----

Spot's signals are the reasons why I don't want to invest more of *my*
time to get repotags for EPEL.

> and fesco couldn't
> care less, they don't like the idea of repotags (especially from their
> non-rhel pov), but they wouldn't veto any such decision either.

Likely. But just FYI: FESCo itself decided against repotags in the past
for EPEL (in the early EPEL days), too.

CU
thl