status of up2date and rhn-applet

[Jesse Keating]

On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 10:53 +0100, Joachim Frieben wrote:
> Thanks for your clarification. I was referring to the use of "pup"
> and "up2date-gnome" as pure update tools. Updated add-on packages for
> FC <rel> should not depend on updates of the core, that's what I meant.

But it happens.  Extras is an integral part of Fedora.  Extras packages
will be available during the install.  Extras packages do sometimes
depend on Core packages, so the updates have to be coordinated.  If you
turn off extras, and try to do an update, you can get to a state were
the update cannot complete.  The end user shouldn't care about this,
they shouldn't care where the package comes from, they just want to
Update the system.  This is what I think Pup is being designed for.

> For example "updates" and "updates-testing" repositories will be mutually
> independent. They might of course require the availablity of the release
> core repository for satisfying dependencies of updated packages which,
> of course, should always be present.

But updates-testing is what I would call an 'add-on' repository.
Something you said above shouldn't depend on core....

> As a matter of fact, there is a fundamental problem of not having the
> same structure in Fedora Extras as in Fedora Core where packages are
> split between "os", "updates" and "updates-testing".

How so?  What "os" is in Extras?  Extras is rolling, rolls with the FC
punches.  There is no static 'on cd' version of Extras to call
'os' (yet).  It makes no sense to try and group a set of Extras packages
into something called 'os'.  Thats why there is just Extras.

> Finally, I do not see any compelling reason for abandoning "up2date-gnome"
> or at least its GUI yet. Any basic user can simply confirm the default
> settings without worrying about details. The experienced user will
> appreciate the additional information and make customizations at will.

Unfortunately you haven't looked at the code.  This is the main
(technical) reason I've heard for abandoning it.  The code is not
manageable going forward.  It also is not designed the way that Fedora
developers envision the end-user tool set, but this is less of a
technical reason, more of a UI reason.

-- 
Jesse Keating RHCE      (geek.j2solutions.net)
Fedora Legacy Team      (www.fedoralegacy.org)
GPG Public Key          (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub)
 
Was I helpful?  Let others know:
 http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=jkeating