Sriram Narayanan wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 12:38 AM, Shawn Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
>>> I believe that Moinak's thoughts are : if the search operation is
>>> pushed to the client (like, say, with rpm/apt), then the server would
>>> become http, file, ftp, etc without needing a custom server behind
>>> those services.
>> The client already has search capability locally, so that seems a moot
>> point.
>>
>> However, local search doesn't solve the problem of trying to search for
>> things you don't even have.  It also doesn't scale very well when you want
>> to search a specific repository's contents.
>>
> 
> Thanks for the info, Shawn. It does seem that the server would need to
> search an index instead of the client, though.
> 
> apt's mechanism of pulling in catalogs and then searching them locally
> seems scalable enough to not put the load of having an additional
> service on the server.
> 
> Sorry, I'm mentioning other existing packaging technologies because
> that is what I know and understand (and these are what my peers know
> and understand too).

If the client wants to search the contents of a repository without 
downloading all of the information it needs and indexing it, remote 
search becomes a necessity.

As I said before, the client already has search, so I'm not sure why 
this is a sticking point.  remote search is a value-add.

>>> Yes, one may say that convincing mirror hosts to run custom servers
>>> would be Belenix's headache, but given that we've always given to and
>>> taken from the various opensolaris technologies, we see it to
>>> everyone's advantage if we had a discussion first before going
>>> elsewhere :)
>> As we have already responded, this will eventually be possible.  We fully
>> intend mirrors to be able to serve package content.  We have several bugs
>> open to change our transport methodology to accommodate this.
>>
> 
> If there will someday be a depot-free future, I think that the client
> will have to pull in the catalog and conduct the search. I myself see
> no other alternative, but I'll wait and watch.

The future is highly unlikely to be completely depot-free.  The depot 
still provides many valuable bits of functionality that a static server 
cannot adequately provide.  In particular, the publishing bits are 
likely to remain tied to the depot server.

Mirroring will be depot-free in the future, to the extent that the 
contents of packages can be mirrored.  However, certain other aspects 
will still require a depot server.

I would encourage you to look at our bug list to figure out what 
direction we're moving in this area.

>>> If well discussed in an open and amicable manner, upstream
>>> contributions could actually happen in a nice manner. Sun has a good
>>> track record on several projects on this front, after all.
>> ...and that process would likely move very slowly.  OpenSolaris has unique
>> platform requirements and needs that would require changes that upstream
>> projects would be unlikely to accept.  Examples of this that come to mind
>> are: our zfs integration, zones support, license entitlement, etc.
>>
> 
> I believe the apt port to OpenSolaris addresses almost all of those
> above. The license entitlement is something that I'm not qualified to
> comment on, though.

I can't comment on Nexenta's apt, as I have no personal experience with 
it.  But I do know that they have a very different approach than we do 
just from what I've read and seen in their flash demos.

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

Reply via email to