half baked idea for further baking: "fedora-ugly" repo

John Dulaney jdulaney at fedoraproject.org
Sun Feb 9 16:13:03 UTC 2014


> Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2014 01:25:01 -0500
> From: mattdm at fedoraproject.org
> To: env-and-stacks at lists.fedoraproject.org
> Subject: half baked idea for further baking: "fedora-ugly" repo
>
> This idea has come up several times at DevConf, and I thought I'd throw it
> out here so it can maybe get further development and discussion.
>
> COPRs are cool, but very much the uncharted wilderness. The Fedora
> distribution proper is a stockade fort with high walls -- it's very nice
> iside (with some rough parts of town... I can take this analogy all the
> way...) but the barrier to get in is giantic and topped with spikes.
>
> And it's not just that there's a lack of guidelines. Different COPRs repos
> don't need to work together, and it's imposible to tell which will or to
> have any epectation that two which work together today will work together
> tomorrow. And, packages aren't signed at all.
>
> So, the proposal: a new repository in the Fedora Project which I am
> tentatively calling "Fedora Ugly". It could be "Fedora Staging", but I think
> that promises a bit much (some things may remain here for a really, really
> long time). This repo would provide an integration space where packages from
> diverse COPRs repos could come together, and also be more discoverable by
> other Fedora developers and users (just add one repo).
>
> Some specifics:
>
> - it could feed from COPRs -- add your packages by checking a box
> - packages would only go in if they meet minimal automatic gating --
> can't conflict with other packages
> - possibly some sort of automatic flagging of crazy %pre or %post package
> scripts?
> - if they don't meet the gating, package owner would get an email
> explaining the problem
> - Fedora packaging guidelines don't apply fully, but maybe some subset
> is appropriate?
> - degree to which packages would be allowed here forever vs. encouraged
> to improve so they can eventually be in the main repo is an open question
> - repo would be off by default, but easily enabled in yum or in Gnome
> Software
> - packages would be signed, possibly by a different key from the main
> Fedora one.
> - signing could be automatic rather than manual
> - ugly-testing or ugly-updates repo, and rolling release vs versioning? to
> be figured out!
>
> What do people think of this idea overall? Anyone interested in polishing
> this up into a Real Thing?
>
>
> --
> Matthew Miller -- Fedora Project -- <mattdm at fedoraproject.org>
> _______________________________________________
> env-and-stacks mailing list
> env-and-stacks at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/env-and-stacks

Putting on my QA hat here, I think that we need to ensure that packages run
through full depcheck rather than just get checked for conflicts.  In fact, they
should run through the full automation process once we that up and running.

Also, I do not believe that we should ever have a package in our distro that
does not meet licensing.  If Fedora even hints at shipping non-open source
software, then you're going to drive a bunch of people away.

John. 		 	   		  


More information about the env-and-stacks mailing list