Push scripts, mash (was: Re: FESCo wants to ban direct stable pushes in Bodhi (urgent call for feedback))

[Bill Nottingham]

Kevin Kofler (kevin.kofler at chello.at) said: 
> > While that would make things simpler and shorter, I doubt it's really
> > practical. Enough people use and want multilib that I don't think we can
> > just unilaterally remove it. Moreover, the multilib portion of the compose
> > isn't the primary time eater.
> > 
> > I certianly don't want to go back to the whitelist case where every time
> > someone needed a new multilib package we had to update a static whitelist
> > in the update push tool. That's just silly.
> 
> Why can't we just tell them to add the 32-bit repo to their configuration? 
> Possibly even ship fedora-32bit and fedora-updates-32bit configs (disabled 
> by default)? With the exactarch=1 setting (the current default), this 
> shouldn't be a big problem. The only problem I see is that people would run 
> into file conflicts if they use exactarch=0 or yum install 
> someapplication.i686, but it's easy to close those as NOTABUG ("sorry, 
> multilib is not supported for this package, just use the 64-bit version"). 
> If those reports become a big problem, isa-based Conflicts tags could be 
> added.

Off the top of my head, it would break the install DVD usage case and the wine
usage case. It would also make multilib_policy as a configuration option
meaningless, as you couldn't ever set it to anything other than 'best' and
expect it to work.

Bill