F22 Self Contained Change: Disabled Repositories Support

[Jan Zelený]

On 16. 3. 2015 at 15:52:10, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> = Proposed Self Contained Change: Disabled Repositories Support =
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DisabledRepoSupport
> 
> Change owner(s): Richard Hughes <rhughes at redhat dot com>
> 
> The Software tool and PackageKit now support disabled repositories to help
> users locate software in additional repositories which are not meant to be
> enabled by default.
> 
> * This Change is announced after the Change Submission Deadline as an
> exception to the process. May not be approved for proposed Fedora release. *
> 
> == Detailed Description ==
> This feature aims to reduce the technical hurdles for users and developers
> to locate software packaged for a distribution, but which needs to be
> clearly identified as not officially included (or possibly sanctioned) by
> that distribution.
> 
> When Software (via PackageKit) queries a repo definition that contains the
> line enabled_metadata=1, even if the repo is disabled, it will download
> repodata. This feature allows a user to locate software in response to a
> search. If the user wants to install the software, she receives a dialog
> with information that the repo must be enabled to satisfy the request, and
> if relevant, information about the nature of the software (for instance, if
> it is non- libre).
> 
> N.B. This feature does not currently operate in Fedora, since no such repo
> definitions are currently shipped. However, the feature could be used by
> remixers, and in the future in Fedora in the event of a policy change.
> 
> == Scope ==
> * Proposal owners: Include enhancements in gnome-software/PackageKit (done)
> * Other developers: N/A (not a System Wide Change)
> * Release engineering: N/A (not a System Wide Change)
> ** Note: For this feature to be used in Fedora requires an additional *-
> release-extra package to ship disabled repo definition
> * Policies and guidelines: N/A (not a System Wide Change)
> ** Note: For this feature to be used in Fedora requires clearer approval
> from FESCo and the Council

I wonder, are there any implications for dnf in terms of being consistent with 
the new behavior of Gnome Software? I realize that people using dnf have more 
options than people using Gnome Software (--enablerepo for instance) but this 
sounds like the beginning of the end of disabled repositories.

Personally, I don't like the semantics of these semi-disabled repos. It beats 
the purpose of disabling the repos in the first place, doesn't it? I mean I 
don't get why user would specify enabled_metadata=1 when he can achieve almost 
the same result with disabled=0 (the only difference I can see is one 
additional popup dialog). Or is there something I'm missing?

Thanks
Jan