<moved over from the CentOS list to CentOS-devel> On Wed, 2006-11-22 at 01:06 +0000, Karanbir Singh wrote: > Matthew Miller wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 21, 2006 at 06:32:29PM +0000, C. L. Martinez wrote: > >> Somebody knows if exists some roadmap about release beta process for CentOS > >> 5 in parallell with RedHat ?? Or we need ot wait until RedHat 5 will be > >> released?? > > > > I'm also curious if there's plans to do a separate Desktop and Server > > release. From what I saw in RHEL5 beta1, there's apparently a slightly > > different set of packages in each.... > > There is going to be a bit of a discussion on this soon, also howto > manage the various repos within each tree. > > - KB There are differences in the upstream release for Client and Server (much like the difference between AS, ES, WS, Red Hat Desktop, etc). We handled this in CentOS-3 and CentOS-4 by just releasing the AS package set and it contains all the other subsets. It is slightly different now, however, as there are separate yum repositories (and directories) for Server, Client, VM, Cluster*, etc. on the EL5 Beta2 CDs (much like CentOS has extras, centosplus, etc. :P). In a yum tree on the server this is not too hard, links can be created to connect the packages that are the same and all can co-exist in one tree. (that might also work OK for the Binary DVD too ... we might be able to fit all the packages on the DVD in separate repos/dirs and keep it under 4.3gb) As far as I know, ln -s or hardlinks will not translate to size savings (or even work) on an iso9660 CD ... therefore it seems that we may have to either: 1. Combine all the packages into a single repository (CentOS or Release or Server, etc.) This is similar to what we currently do on 3 and 4 now, with all the AS packages included. or 2. Release a CD set with Server and Client (and all the other repos on it ... showing everything) ... no idea how much space that takes yet or if it is doable. I would think (if we can't use links) that this set would be 6-9 discs in size. or 3. Release a Client and Server CD, and a Client and Server DVD ... but put everything in one yum tree with a Client and Server and all the other dirs/repos under that tree. (I would imagine that each set would be 4-5 discs in size) I think 3 is the way that makes the most sense ... it also requires the most disk space and bandwidth ... and requires the most maintenance. Option 1 is less disk space, in keeping with what we currently do, BUT creates an install that is not much like upstream. Once installed, either of these methods becomes the same as all yum repos should be enabled by default, unless we have a centOS-release- client and centOS-release-server ... so that if you install client, you get only client repos by default and for server, only server repos by default .... and you could enable the others too manually on each if you want. The developers need to play with all these ideas and test several things before we can even smartly discuss these options. Once we have a better idea what this entails, we can discuss it further. I'm sure Oracle is waiting on our decision, so we should make it soon :P Thanks, Johnny Hughes -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20061122/01d42aab/attachment-0006.sig>