On 19/06/2019 19:22, Brian Stinson wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019, at 13:07, Karanbir Singh wrote: >> On 19/06/2019 17:45, Brian Stinson wrote: >> > >> > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019, at 11:32, Karanbir Singh wrote: >> >> On 19/06/2019 17:18, Fabian Arrotin wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> We plan to compose all of those repositories, and deliver updates >> >> in the same stream. >> >> > >> >> > Just so that people realize : no *updates* repo anymore, so all >> combined >> >> > : if you install from network $today, what you'll install >> $tomorrow will >> >> > have all rolled-in directly >> >> > >> >> >> >> that's not going to work - we need to retain the ability to deliver >> >> reproducible installs. >> > >> > Can you clarify this? What "reproducible install" pattern is broken >> here? >> > >> >> >> >> I need to be able to run installs against a mirror, weeks and months >> apart and arrive at the same payload installed exactly. >> >> regards > > Is there something preventing you from doing that if we ship updates in > the same repo as the 0-day release content? > yes, if i yum install <httpd>; with the base only. I'd like to get the same httpd, not the 3 versions removed in the updates that have now landed in the same repo. again, this maybe just a case of publishing a 2nd set of metadata rather than retain the base rpm set, but we need to retain this functionality. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 490 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20190619/b6caa03e/attachment-0008.sig>