(non-)compatibility of repositories (was: The following packages have been kept back)

[Axel Thimm]

I took the liberty to add fedora-devel to the recipients' list.

On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 03:54:53AM -1000, Warren Togami wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-04-18 at 02:50, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > > You appear to be using Fedora apt.
> > > http://www.fedora.us/wiki/RepositoryMixingProblems
> > > Read this for an explanation.  Mixing repositories will always lead to
> > > problems.
> > This is not true, it only depends on the repository coordinators'
> > intentions. atrpms has been freshrpms.net compatible from the first day on
> > ....  (it even depends on it)
> Axel, I respectfully disagreed with your earlier posts advocating for
> repository cooperation because I felt, and still do feel, it is unworkable.
> The time overhead is just too high, and how do you do proper testing when
> users will use arbitrary mixes of repositories?  THAT is a nightmare.

I am doing it for the rpms I provide wrt freshrpms. When I get some more time,
I will try to check Dag's repository in that respect, too (of course if Dag's
and Matthias' repositories are too incompatible, I loose, as compatibility is
transitive here, but then I would try to talk to them, not replace them ...).

> > > The goal of Fedora is to eventually make it so people never feel the
> > > need to mix repositories anymore, forever alleviating these package
> > > clashes.
> > On the way there fedora is creating these clashes.
> I'm sorry, but my position and the position of many others was that it was
> unavoidable.  I do respect your right to disagree though.

Currently fedora is creating the nightmare you mention. People _expect_
different repositories to be mixable, apt and yum provide ways to have
different sources, and then you create something incompatible to any other
repository out there?

If freshrpms.net is your 'source of inspiration' why do you stab at it (and
all the other repositories)? Instead of putting so much energy in replacing or
swallowing freshrpms, you could try to extend it. Matthias has signaled to
accept patches, if his builds can be improved, and he seems to do so. What was
so wrong with freshrpms?

This looks to me like 'resistance is futile, you will be assimilated' and
sometimes like 'there can only be one'.

When I joined fedora I was excited about having a project to create
inter-repository coordination and compatibilty rules. Instead, any comment
towards this direction was treated with hostility. Creating a firm
specification for fedora and other repositories was rejected due to lack of
time, leading to the now often 'mind changes' and non-transparent and
autocratic like decision paths.

> I did make some large mistakes in my tone toward you in the past few months
> on fedora-devel and for that I am sorry.  I was also wrong in some of the
> facts and reasoning that I used in those posts.  I made mistakes back then
> while under stress.  Please do not take this particular thread personally,
> this stance is my technical opinion.
> 
> You have proved me wrong about your earlier assertion with release tags
> beginning with "0" that I was initially opposed to, but eventually realized
> that it was technically sound.  Now that we have been using that same for a
> while, I can see many instances where that particular choice was the right
> technical call, and you were instrumental in making it happen.  Thank you
> very much.
>
> I ask everyone now, rather than complain about package clashes and Warren's
> refusal to cooperate (what a jack ass!), please join the collaborative
> Fedora packaging effort and forever put and end to repository mixing
> problems.  We can progress much further working together than the past
> situation of many independent repositories.

Collaboration and cooperation needs to be both ways. Currently (towards me at
least) I see only fedora induced breakage (e.g. the epoch:0 induced problems),
that others have to take care of. Why do I have to loose time with fixing
something I didn't break?

There is large potential in the fedora developer community, espacially when I
think about the apt and yum gurus there. I believe that fedora needs to
rethink its goals and ways of interaction with people and repositories, as it
is currently making people turn away. For one you cannot ignore the existence
of repositories like freshrpms.net, just like you cannot ignore Red Hat and
its updates. Including freshrpms.net _belongs_ to the QA testing.

</grief><optimism><flowers_floating_in_the_air>

 Imagine a project providing centralized repository coordination and
 infrastructure (including documentation & specifications), and a common set of
 administrative rpms (like rpm, apt, yum, synaptic) as Rex is
 proposing.

 Different repositories plug into that infrastructure and become compatible to
 some standard, while still retaining their supremeness of their own packaging.

 This project would be a meta-repository providing assistance to legacy or new
 packagers/repositories to create compatible rpms. There could be simple
 self-specified compatible repositories and others truly QA tested by this
 project (and signed accordingly). The main idea is to enable end users to
 have access to all rpms and packagers a fast and short way of creating
 rpms or even repositories compatible to this world.

 Currently this is not fedora, but could fedora change its course of action
 towards this?

</flowers_floating_in_the_air></optimism><reality>

Probably this is just a dream, and I will wake up in a minute with Borks and
Highlanders around me ...

Bottom line is: Try to take into consideration the current repository scenery,
and try not to treat people like your employees, and you will have a larger
community.

Please take this as a desparate attempt for constructive criticism and not a
flame. No swordflashes and lightnings again ... :(

> Warren Togami
> warren at togami.com
-- 
Axel.Thimm at physik.fu-berlin.de
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.egwn.net/pipermail/freshrpms-list/attachments/20030419/28cd14dd/attachment.bin