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

Re: [Pulp-list] meta-packages

On 09/21/2012 08:23 AM, Dennis Gregorovic wrote:
On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 10:42 +0200, Stephen Benjamin wrote:
On Thu, 2012-09-20 at 15:26 -0500, Jeff Ortel wrote:

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.


# 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:


# 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.


# 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:


than it would be to have this:


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.

Thanks, Dennis. I meant to mention comps.xml groups as something we are considering. One question - how do we get comps.xml groups into fedora? I've looked through the package maintainer docs and can't find anything on this. Can you point me to something? Although pulp is not in fedora yet, we fully intend to contribute it.

-- Dennis

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