[Pulp-list] Handling Uploads to repos with feed
Pradeep Kilambi
pkilambi at redhat.com
Mon Oct 11 20:18:12 UTC 2010
On 10/11/2010 03:41 PM, Jason L Connor wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I figure I'll weigh in with my 2¢.
>
> I did initially like the idea of keeping repositories that allow package
> upload separate from repositories with feeds. This is mighty tempting
> given its simplicity.
>
> However, after reading all the arguments, Mike, Jeff, and John have had
> some really good points. If we do not treat feeds as authoritative, and
> as simply a batch source for packages, I think this introduces much
> greater flexibility in the pulp management model than we had before.
>
> I think I'd like to see us adopt this non-authoritative view. We should:
> * allow a repository to define more than one feed
>
Why? This is gonna break the whole premise of exposing the repos on pulp
similar to its source. Today if a repo has a feed from
/content/fedora/13/ we serve it that way to clients from pulp. How do we
expect to serve the same when we have multiple feeds? I dont see the
point of having multiple feeds for a given repo when I can have three
repos exposed the same way from pulp.
> * allow package upload to all repositories
>
Again, I dont see any benefit of doing this. Do we have a proper use
case to do this or are we just doing this because we can.
> * allow admin to pull content from one or more of the defined feeds
>
Not sure what this means.
> * should probably change the semantics of 'sync' to 'pull' (or
> something similar)
>
+1
> I like this model because it's actually a super-set of the functionality
> we now offer and doesn't (theoretically) sound like it's a prohibitive
> amount of work to get it going.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pulp-list mailing list
> Pulp-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-list/attachments/20101011/e556e6f6/attachment.htm>
More information about the Pulp-list
mailing list