What do we think of this?

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

On 28.03.2007 15:34, Greg Dekoenigsberg wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>>> Add to that the implicit problem of two(or more) disconnected repositories.
>>> When we push updates in Fedora, we can and do break deps in the 3rd party
>>> repos.  They have to rebuild against what we're publishing as updates before
>>> their deps are fixed.  For OUR repos, we can prepare all these builds before
>>> pushing live so that the repos stay consistant.  External parties do not have
>>> this luxury.  And I'm not about to run repoclosure on N+ 3rd party repos
>>> before pushing out an update.
>> Here's where things could get interesting -- Can we make it easy for
>> third party repositories to stay informed of what dep-breaking packages
>> have been built and are waiting to be pushed to the repository?  Can we
>> make it easy for them to grab those packages and do a rebuild that waits
>> in the wings for our push to make the new package live?
>>
>> And most importantly, how much work do they want to put into taking the
>> data we provide and turning it into something that helps them keep up to
>> date?
> 
> +1.  [...]

Greg, thanks for your support. I know of at least one 3rd party repo
that actually asked once or twice to get a heads up before kernel
updates before they get pushed, but the request was denied :-/

CU
thl