Hello Vladimir, I definitely agree that using one uri for generating number of repos is not the best solution. According to Fuel Menu - there was the discussion in gerrit [1] about repositories format. The first version of my patch implements actually your idea about equality and independence of repositories. It meets disagreements and no one voted for this POV. So I had to change the implementation in favor to the current version.
According to this situation I would like to discuss if proposed changes are needed before making new patch. Guys, who took part in the previous patch discussion, please share your opinions. [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/242646/ 2015-12-10 22:47 GMT+03:00 Vladimir Kozhukalov <[email protected]>: > Dear colleagues, > > At the moment we have several places where we configure multiple rpm/deb > repositories. Those are: > > 1. Web UI (cluster settings tab) where we define repos for cluster > deployment > 2. Fuel-menu (bootstrap section) where we define repos for building > ubuntu bootstrap image > 3. Fuel-mirror where we define repos that are to be cloned (full or > partial mirrors) > > I'd prefer all these places to provide the same UX. By that I mean that > these components should use the same input data structure like this [0], > i.e. a flat list of fully independent repositories (see an example below). > First repo in the list is supposed to be a base OS repo (i.e. contains base > packages like libc). > > [ > { > type: deb, > url: some-url, > section: some-section, > suite: some-suite, > priority: some-priority > }, > { > type: deb, > url: another-url, > section: another-section, > suite: another-suite, > priority: another-priority > }, > ... > ] > > I'd like to focus on the fact that these repositories should be defined > independently (no base url, no base suite, etc.) That makes little sense to > speculate about consistency of a particular repository. We only should talk > about consistency of the whole list of repositories together. > > I'll try to explain. In the real world we usually deal with sets of > repositories which look like this: > > http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/trusty/ > http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/trusty-updates/ > http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/trusty-security/ > http://mirror.fuel-infra.org/mos-repos/ubuntu/8.0/dists/mos8.0/ > http://mirror.fuel-infra.org/mos-repos/ubuntu/8.0/dists/mos8.0-updates/ > http://mirror.fuel-infra.org/mos-repos/ubuntu/8.0/dists/mos8.0-security/ > > As you can see these repositories have common hosts and base suites and it > instills us to think that repositories should not be defined separately > which is wrong. This special case does not break the whole approach. It is > just a special case. Repositories are nothing more than just sets of > packages that can depend on each other forming a tree when taken together. > Package relation does matter, not repository location, not suite name. > Parsing package tree for a set of repositories we can easily figure out > whether this set is consistent or not (e.g. python-packetary allows to do > this). > > Taking into account the above, I'd say UI should allow a user to define > repositories independently not forcing to use special patterns like suite + > suite-updates + suite-security, not forcing repositories to be located on > the same host. That means we should modify fuel-menu bootstrap section > which currently allows a user to define a base url that is then used to > form a group of repos (base, base-updates, base-security). Besides, it > contradicts to our use case when we put mosX.Y locally on the master node > while mosX.Y-updates and mosX.Y-security are supposed to be available > online. > > What do you guys think of that? > > > [0] > https://github.com/openstack/fuel-web/blob/master/nailgun/nailgun/fixtures/openstack.yaml#L2006-L2053 > > > Vladimir Kozhukalov > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > -- Kind Regards, Fedor Zhadaev Skype: zhadaevfm IRC: fzhadaev
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
