Tom Mueller wrote:
Brock Pytlik wrote:
There are three distinct entities, publishers, streams, and
repositories. Publishers are the entities who put together
distributions, sign packages, etc... Specifically, they distribute
one or more streams (or trains or whatever term we settle on. dev and
release are two examples of streams for the opensolaris.org
publisher.). Repositories are simply collections of packages,
possibly from multiple publishers and multiple streams from those
publishers.
About repositories - first, I'm assuming that there is a distinction
between a pkg.depotd process and a repository. A repository would be
identified by a unique URL, but a pkg.depotd process might eventually
service multiple repositories. Is that right?
No, I think we're suggesting moving to a model where there's a
one-to-one mapping between pkg.depotd process and a repository. But that
depo/repo/process might serve up packages from many streams and many
publishers.
Essentially, we want to move to a model where a repo/depo is just a
container that hands out bits of packages to clients as needed. In
short, the average user should never need to care what repo(s) they're
connected to.
Does that make things clearer?
Brock
So assuming that a repository is identified by a unique URL (possible
with mirrors that are identified by other URLs), what would be an
example of where multiple streams would be served from a single
repository? Also, what would be an example of where packages from
multiple publishers would be coming from a single repository?
I'm wondering if the world would be simpler if we just chose to limit
a repository to containing packages from a single stream from a single
repository. This would make a 1:1 relationship between stream and
repository - effectively the two concepts are the same.
Thanks.
Tom
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
