Danek Duvall wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 07:02:50PM -0800, Bart Smaalders wrote:
> 
>> Alan Coopersmith wrote:
>>> Based on the discussion in the meeting last week this becomes something 
>>> like:
>>>
>>>     [ ] Redistributable Live CD
>>>     [ ] Redistributable Packages DVD
>>>     [ ] Redistributable Repository (pkg.opensolaris.org)
>>>     [ ] Non-Redistributable Repository (pkg.sun.com)
>>>
>>> where a reason is needed for anything other than the pkg.os.o repo.
>> Shouldn't redistributability be a tag in the package?
> 
> Sure.
> 
>> How does the package owner determine the CD vs REPO vs DVD question?
> 
> The same way they know now whether to ask to be in the miniroot or on the
> CCD or in the WOS, or on CD1, etc.  Mostly, people don't care, and there's
> a default answer.  With a redistributable tag, that bit at least is done
> automatically.  But the WITs (D-Teams?) are going to have to have at least
> a little bit of help from the engineering teams to decide what needs to be
> in the most core bits.
> 

We should need much less help, though, if our automated dependency 
analysis works well and takes into account both executable dependencies 
and service dependencies.  The main area where I think we'd need manual 
data to help with is in the case of new drivers.

>> For well known places like ON, new packages that _have_ to be there in
>> order to boot should be part of a well-known group package that the
>> distro dudes use....
> 
> Not all core packages come from ON, which means that some
> cross-consolidation teams are going to have to decide the boundaries of
> those incorporations.  They're going to need to know which packages are
> required for boot, and I don't think we can rely on the package developers
> to always make that distinction correctly.  (Ruby?  Of course that needs to
> be on the live CD -- I'll tag it with livecd=true!)
> 

I agree with Bart that it's a distribution builder's decision what to 
include, not a package maintainer's.  I'd argue that implies that the 
tags they supply should be qualitative in terms of what the package 
contains (e.g. "network-driver=true"), and not prescriptive (e.g. 
livecd=true).  Let the distribution work from there to construct its 
recipes.

Dave
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss

Reply via email to