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

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



On Mon, 2010-10-11 at 16:18 -0400, Pradeep Kilambi wrote:
> 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.
> 
> 
What I like about the multiple feed scenario is that it's a super set of
the single feed scenario. Just because we allow multiple feeds, doesn't
mean an admin has to define multiple feeds per repo.

I just think allow multiple feeds buys us greater flexibility.

> >   * 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.
>
I'm thinking of the super set case here, where an admin wants to expose
a third-party repo, which additional (possibly home-spun) packages.

> >   * allow admin to pull content from one or more of the defined
> feeds
> >    
> 
> Not sure what this means. 

This is only applicable if there are multiple feeds defined. I'm
thinking we wouldn't require a sync to pull content from every feed, but
allow the admin to pick and choose which feeds to update from.

-- 
Jason L Connor
Software Engineer
Systems Management and Cloud Enablement
Red Hat, Inc.
+1.919.890.8331
RHCT #605010081634021
Freenode: linear

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


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