[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Pulp-list] Handling Uploads to repos with feed



On 10/11/2010 10:20 AM, Jeff Ortel wrote:


On 10/11/2010 10:17 AM, Pradeep Kilambi wrote:
Should we allow the case where, user creates a repo with a feed, syncs
down the content and then tries to upload additional content to the same
repo?

Pros:

* A user probably will have an easy time adding custom content to their
repos without having to create new repos

Cons:

* We need to regenerate metadata for the repo. Today we get the metadata
for repos with feed directly from the feed.
* Will need to worry about what version of RHEL/Fedora pulp is running
on for compatible yum metadata.
* For Red Hat repos, we probably dont want to allow this anyway. So
we'll need some extra rules to bypass this.

Overall seems like keeping uploads separate from feed repos is cleaner.
User can always create a new repo, upload content and subscribe to both
repos to get that additional content.

Agreed, we should keep them separate.

Also, we discussed (in imanage) supporting repos which extend other repos.  If we still
intend to do this, then users can easily create a repo with no feed that extends a repo
that does have a feed.  This mitigates the need to subscribe to both repos.


I still don't see why it is all that different than what we have now with the addition of the need to run createrepo --update after a sync like we do now after a package upload ...

Is there something more than that?

Mike


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]