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

Re: [Pulp-list] meta-packages



On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 10:42 +0200, Stephen Benjamin wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-09-20 at 15:26 -0500, Jeff Ortel wrote:
> > All,
> > 
> > As you know, pulp v2 is packaged into quite a few packages (RPMSs).  In 
> > an effort to make this more manageable for users, we decided to provide 
> > meta-packages that would bundle the platform packages + RPM support 
> > packages.  We weren't 100% convinced this was the way to go but decided 
> > to try it anyway.  After living with if for a bit, the bad taste in my 
> > mouth just hasn't gone away and, in fact, has gotten worse with the 
> > introduction of puppet support.  Nothing against the puppet support :) 
> > If we continue using the meta-packages, users would do wonky things when 
> > installing a pulp server with both RPM and puppet support.
> > 
> > Like:
> > 
> > # yum install pulp-rpm-server pulp-puppet-server
> >
> > This /seems/ like they're install two separate servers.
> > 
> > Unless there is objection, I plan to get rid of the meta-packages under 
> > products/.  What does this mean for users?  It means that when 
> > installing pulp, users will install the platform packages + the support 
> > packages they need.  Here is what this will look like:
> > 
> > THE PULP SERVER:
> > 
> > # yum install pulp-server
> > 
> > ... and for RPM support:
> > 
> > # yum install pulp-rpm-plugins
> > 
> > For pulp-admin:
> > 
> > # yum install pulp-admin-client
> > 
> > ... and for RPM support:
> > 
> > # yum install pulp-rpm-admin-extensions
> > 
> > In both cases, yum depsolving does most of the work.
> > 
> > Here is the shortest version of how a user would install a pulp server + 
> > RPM support & the admin client:
> > 
> > # yum install pulp-rpm-plugins pulp-rpm-admin-extensions
> > 
> > Again, yum depsolving does most of the work.
> > 
> > 
> > ON THE CONSUMER:
> > 
> > # yum install 
> >
> > ... and for RPM support:
> > 
> > # yum install pulp-rpm-consumer-extensions
> > 
> > For the agent:
> > 
> > # yum install pulp-agent
> > 
> > .. and for RPM support:
> > 
> > # yum install pulp-rpm-handlers
> > 
> > Here is the short version:
> > 
> > # yum install pulp-rpm-consumer-extensions pulp-rpm-handlers
> > 
> > Users can also get creative with yum wildcards.
> > 
> > Still considering package groups in addition to this ....
> > 
> > Thoughts, Objections?
> 
> My first impression as an end-user of pulp is this is overly
> complicated, why does it have to be so compartmentalized?  I don't know
> why you should have to jump through hoops (albeit, small ones) to
> install support for RPM repositories.  I think that "yum install
> pulp-server" should give you a working pulp server with a set of core
> functionality, and pulp-consumer should do the same.
> 
> For any automation cases, like in a kickstart or in puppet/chef/cfengine
> it's much simpler to specify one package:
> 
> pulp-consumer
> 
> than it would be to have this:
> 
> pulp-consumer-client
> pulp-rpm-consumer-extensions
> pulp-agent
> pulp-rpm-handlers
> 
> Just my $0.02.

In general, comps.xml groups are the preferred way to add convenience
for installing groups of packages together.  meta-packages are useful if
you need to specify specific package versions.  For pulp, I would
suggest a comps.xml group.

-- Dennis


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