On 9. 4. 2013 at 12:25:56, seth vidal wrote:
On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 11:18:54 -0500
Bruno Wolff III <bruno(a)wolff.to> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 00:05:45 +0800,
>
> Mathieu Bridon <bochecha(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> >The current behaviour would be obtained by setting it to 1, and
> >setting it to 2 would already be a positive change as it would allow
> >downgrading a package if the update went wrong.
>
> I don't think that is really what you want either. The idea is to
> keep recently obsoleted updates around, not 2 or 3 versions of
> everything.
>
> The change has some other benefits. Reverting bad updates in rawhide
> would be easier. You can use yum downgrade instead of having to going
> look at koji and download builds. Dealing with packages dropping out
> of repos when moving between test and updates. The latter issue is
> especially bad with branched during freezes.
So - this is just an idea - and not necessarily a good one - but what
about moving older pkgs which are not in the initial release repo into
an updates-archive repo.
We could leave the repo disabled by default and only keep 2 copies of
any single pkg name in the repo at a time.
That way in the best of all possible worlds you'd have at most 4 copies
of a pkg in total:
1 - in the base release 'everything' repo
1 - in updates
2 - in updates-archive
I'm not sure this solves the initial problem - downloading new metadata every
6 hours or so ...