On 11/17/2014 08:46 AM, Chris Duryee wrote: > Would RPMs be built from the meta-repo, or for each python package?
We could do it that way, or we could just use our new pulp_packaging repo for that. I guess that begs the question of what the meta repo would be good for, but perhaps it would be useful for something still (playpen? docs?). > I was never able to get pip to work with our current repo layout either, > without checking the entire repo out to disk and then installing from there. Yeah that's a pain, and it's also non-conventional in general. Maybe that's not so bad, but I've been trying to think of ways we can do this more easily. I've looked at some other projects in the past that use a ton of repositories, and they often have tools to help them manage it. Android seems to have written their own tool (I forgot what it was called, but back when I built from source I had to use it.) Maybe it's not a problem worth solving at this point, but if we can think of a way to get one Python package per git repository that isn't a pain, I'd love to look into it.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Pulp-list mailing list Pulp-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
