Re: Apt at fedora.us

[Warren Togami <warren togami com>]

Ville Skyttä wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-01-28 at 13:47 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 13:31:01 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> >
> >
> > > I had asked Warren Togami to add them on PM and he answered:
> > > "There is little good reason to do so.  Trying to limit the size of that
> > > repository because many mirror administrators see it as redundant."
> > >
> > > This is not true, SRPMS apt-repositories are not redundant. Not having
> > > them implies loss of functionality to apt.
> >
> > Well, then I think the Apt community may need to prove him wrong
> > and do some lobbying.
>
>
> FWIW, I would like to see the complete apt'table (pre-)Extras SRPMS
> repos available at fedora.us and its mirrors.  The reasons have been
> outlined in this thread.

I have to admit that I don't understand if there is any purpose in this. 
    "apt-get source" is only a convenience but otherwise is not very 
useful.  "apt-get build-dep" does not need SRPMS at all except the local 
SRPM, which you already have locally because you want to build it.  Is 
there some aspect of this that I am failing to see?  I fail to see the 
"need" in this.

From the perspective of mirror administrators it is somewhat painful to 
host redundant RPMS.  I personally don't have the disk space to do this 
forever with all distributions.

I suppose it is tolerable to do only SRPMS.extras of the latest stable 
distribution.  When FC4 happens, I will wipe the 3 SRPMS.extras.  Is 
this acceptable?  I will however not add the base and updates SRPMS.

Warren Togami
wtogami redhat com