[Pulp-list] Handling Uploads to repos with feed

[Jeff Ortel]

On 10/11/2010 12:33 PM, Todd B. Sanders wrote:
>   On 10/11/2010 01:20 PM, 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.
>
> Yes, we are supporting this....cloning repos.
> https://fedorahosted.org/pulp/wiki/RepositoryCloning

Have we worked out how the synchronization will worked for repo hierarchies?
If I have repos:

Fedora <- B <- C

Were B clones Fedora and C clones B.

If I sync 'Fedora', will this implicitly sync 'B' and 'C'?  Conversely, if I sync 'B', 
will that implicitly sync it's parents?  Would that make sense?  It would kind of suck if 
the user had to sync them individually, right?  Seems like, as a user, I'd expect 
new/updated packages to magically appear in repo 'C' whenever the 'Fedora' repo is 
synchronized.

Also, IMHO, doing this under the name of 'cloning' seems odd (although I'm okay with it). 
  It's just semantics but it seems more like an 'extends' relationship rather then a 
'clone'.  Unless, the intention is that (Fedora,B,C) are only related by feed.

>
> -Todd
>>
>>>
>>> Lemme know your feedback.
>>>
>>> ~ Prad
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Pulp-list mailing list
>>> Pulp-list at redhat.com
>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pulp-list mailing list
>> Pulp-list at redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5126 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-list/attachments/20101011/900d85d3/attachment.p7s>