Announcing rpmfusion

[Les Mikesell]

Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On 9/12/07, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Or, if you need another level of indirection, include a repo that
>> doesn't itself have anything controversial but has a package that
>> configures yum for repos that might.
> 
> oh classy. So how would that work from a user perspective?
> 
> Let's say the repo you describe exists... let's call it the
> repo-clearinghouse repo. It essentially holds release packages for
> each addon repo that can be installed thus configuring the client to
> pull packages from different addon repos.
> 
> Obviously yum install repoA-release    will install the release
> package for repoA, as held in the clearinghouse repo... but how do you
> expose things in a way that a user can ask which addon repo they need
> to configure?

How does a user know about any other package and decide if they would 
like yum to install it?  A name convention for packages so something 
like 'yum search repo' would find a list of repos that yum could add to 
itself.

> Say I want support for the new foo codec that can't be shipped in
> Fedora.  Do i look in repoA or repoB or repoC ? How would the
> repo-clearinghouse repo expose that repoA was the correct location to
> find all things related to foo codec? How do I ask which repo to
> configure through interaction with the repo-clearinghouse metadata
> specifically to get access to all foo codec related packages?

'yum info repoA-release' might describe why you would want to install 
access to that repo, perhaps to the extent of having the package list or 
at least the ones that you felt could be legally mentioned everywhere.
But, I thought the point of rpm-fusion was to become the only extra repo 
you might need so this decision wouldn't be too complicated.

-- 
    Les Mikesell
     lesmikesell at gmail.com