[CentOS-devel] CentOS-6 repositories: *-devel, *-debuginfo, contrib-{unstable, testing, stable}

Karanbir Singh

mail-lists at karan.org
Wed Jan 5 16:18:50 UTC 2011

Hi Brian

On 12/21/2010 04:13 PM, Brian Schueler wrote:
> As I have seen there is only a subset of development
> libraries included on the upstream's el6 DVD.

Everything that outputs from the srpms is on the CentOS Distro. In the 
past the addons/ repo was used to host packages that were output from 
srpms but not included in the binary distro from Red Hat. During C4/5 we 
sort of lost utility of that repo; but if needed it can be brought back. 
At this time, I dont think we will need it - as Akemi already clarified.

> What about contributer repositories? My idea is to have
> 3 stages of user contrib repositories (two of them
> controlled by the CentOS dev team):

We've been through various iterations of talking about these contrib/ 
extras/ plus/ repo population in the past. Also keep in mind that there 
are quite a few other repo's that do some level of this stuff already 
and are well established.

> [contrib-unstable]
>    where everyone may upload software packages via
>    web (requiring only a simple registration), that
>    are not well tested and not targeted to a production
>    system.

Why would we want to host content like that in and around CentOS ? I 
think a small buildsystem with a public buildqueue would be all thats 
needed for pkgs of this nature, and that can be setup. I dont think 
CentOS should get involved in pushing content that is clearly marked as 
'of dubious quality'.

> [contrib-testing]
>    packages that have been selected by the developer
>    team that needs to be tested.

This will be hard to make work, specially for packages not submitted by 
people who are already on the 'developer' list since they wont want to 
take on an ongoing responsibility for content from a distant entity ( 
could be a person on his/her own or a business or a project ).

> [contib]
>    packages that are fully tested and confirmed to be
>    stable and which does not have any side-effects to
>    the CentOS base installation.

This is nice to have :) We only need to consider the 'no side effects to 
base' with a pinch of salt ( ~ potential to feed the CentOSPlus repo ).

> All these points would make C6 fantastic for everyone
> (for engineers, developers, administrators, end-users
> and even artists).

Personally, I've always been keen on having an effort that can put 
together apps and content for specific groups of people, specially when 
it creates options and alternatives. But the issue that it all comes 
down to is : how do you get a reasonably high level of packaging and how 
do you do that with a sustainable model. One thing that I feel is a 
good-to-have, is to restrict package submittions to people who have 
upstream commit rights and then have a centos-packager-team audit and 
work with the .spec files. That would solve quite a few of the corner 
issues and would go a long way in getting some level of quality and 
consistency across the board. Thoughts ?

- KB

More information about the CentOS-devel mailing list