FC5 and Yum Plugins

Rahul Sundaram sundaram at redhat.com
Fri Dec 30 03:04:36 UTC 2005


Jeff Pitman wrote:

>On 12/30/05, Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta at gmail.com> wrote:
>  
>
>>On 12/29/05, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm at atrpms.net> wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>Exactly. Which is why any repo, be it atrpms or something else, that
>>>does see a need to replace package foo in core, and thus has
>>>overlapping package sets with core will not like this idiom. I have
>>>already been hit by bug reports that stem from improper use of
>>>priorities/weights and scores. Such filtering creates a lot more
>>>issues and debugging problems than it solves.
>>>      
>>>
>>let's be clear.... if protectbase plugin was turned on by default
>>would atrpm leave it enabled on client system or would you attempt to
>>disable the plugin via package scriptlet action?
>>    
>>
>
>For me, if someone wanted to use pyvault, I wouldn't automatically
>disable it. But, I would have to document very prominently that if the
>user wanted to use pyvault, they'd have to turn this off. And, it'd be
>a FAQ, for sure.
>  
>
So would third party repository maintainers consider Fedora Core having 
protectbase by enabled acceptable?. Would it better to document the 
exist the functionality provided by protectbase plugin within the Fedora 
release notes and let users configure it for themselves?

-- 
Rahul 

Learn. Network. Experience open source.
Red Hat Summit Nashville  |  May 30 - June 2, 2006
Learn more: http://www.redhat.com/promo/summit/




More information about the devel mailing list