John Rice wrote:
Brock Pytlik wrote:
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.
So from a users standpoint instead of telling them about Publishers in
the main UI we would change this to something that couples Publishers
and Streams like:
Package Source: opensolaris.org-release
Package Source: opensolaris.org-contrib
Package Source: Sun-extra
I'm not sure what you mean by the "main ui". In general, I don't see a
reason to show a users the streams by default, but then I probably
wouldn't show them the publishers by default in the main window either.
In the Add Publishers the user would specify a URI for the Publisher,
but after that they really shouldn't be messing with a Repository URI
as this is just part of the internal plumbing a Publisher and its
streams are using. Is that right?
Your statement's a little confusing. Ideally, a user should never need
to know about a repo URI at all. They would just add a publisher with
its uri.
So in Manage Publishers, you would list Publishers and their streams,
if a stream was incompatible such as dev and release, we would need to
flag this to the user so they could choose which of these incompatible
streams to use, but in general the Publisher metadata will indicate
what should be the active streams by default and for the general users
they need never worry about having to choose them.
I think that's probably making too firm a statement. Everything should
work without a user needing to change a stream. However, since a
publisher may deliver multiple, compatible streams, a subset of which
are enabled by default, a user may well need to add (or remove) specific
streams to get the packages they want.
I assume all this rework is not targeted for 2010.02? If it is there's
going to be a lot of rework on the GUI side for the Add and Manage
Publishers and presumably on the CLI side as well.
I have no idea about schedules, or even if we'll go this way at all. We
(Shawn and I) put the idea out there for discussion because of what
we've observed from users.
Brock
JR
[snip]
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
