Few updates about Playground repo

Miroslav Suchý msuchy at redhat.com
Thu Apr 16 13:38:09 UTC 2015

On 04/16/2015 01:59 PM, Honza Horak wrote:
> Personally, I'd prefer the first way -- create one repository on copr server side, so clients just install one repo file
> once and just repodata will be updated. That prevents possible issues with copr repo file updating, we don't have to
> check if user disabled the repo to not enable it by mistake etc.

I am not sure what are you meaning first and second. However...

There is already functionality in dnf-plugins-core, which allows you to write:

# dnf playground enable

Which query Copr which projects are in Playground set and store the repo files in:

The set is currently empty :) The idea is that there would be cronjob (which user can disable), which would periodicaly do:
  dnf playground disable
  dnf playground enable
which would update that set of repositories.

The advantages of this approach - compared to one big repo - are:

 * User have better control from where the package is coming - e.g. it comes from msuchy/foo project which is part of
Fedora playground (compare to "it comes from Fedora Playground").
 * User can enable playground and then disable some projects (not possible with one big repository).
 * No additional maintenance - that big one repository will need some maintainer.

Miroslav Suchy, RHCA
Red Hat, Senior Software Engineer, #brno, #devexp, #fedora-buildsys

More information about the env-and-stacks mailing list