[CentOS-devel] Considering repo re-structuring

[Karanbir Singh]

On 11/26/2010 12:35 PM, Morten P.D. Stevens wrote:
> My suggestion: Let's do it just like Red Hat.

Why ?

> CentOS 6 Server (about 3,2 GB)
> CentOS 6 Workstation (about 4 GB)

What about the other variants ?

> [os]
> [updates]
> [optional]
> [extras]

So, are you saying use 'optional' and put updates for pkgs into the same 
place ?

Can we come up with a better name than 'optional' ? Since essentially 
pretty much anything and everything in the CentOS distro is just about 
as optional as anything else.

On the other hand, retaining the name 'optional' might make it easier 
for people comparing upstream and centos - and perhaps share configs.

discuss!

- KB