On Thu, 2008-12-11 at 11:27 -0600, Shawn Walker wrote: > >> I'd hope we don't include the spec files or patches or sources in the > >> package itself. I understand the lofty goal here, but I personally > >> don't feel it's worth the overhead. > > > > Is it such a huge overhead? > > For an individual package? No. In aggregate? Yes. > > * overhead of a few actions to every single manifest in that repository
That would be typically <10 actions. To clarify, I'm not suggesting including unpackaged sources but - spec file(s) - tarball(s) - patch(es) - other sources, if any > * additional indexing overhead to the search engine for each additional item > > * possibly polluted search results > > * increased resource usage of the depot server for what is essentially > static content > > * overall increased processing time for client and server manifest parsing > > * increased publishing time > > * processing overhead for clients to filter out this extra content in > the majority of cases This overhead should be similar or adding a few more packages to the repo, which is what we are planning to do, by the truckloads. > > Note that I'm not suggesting installing the sources on end user > > systems, only to include them in the repo. This is the most simple > > way to ensure that the binary packages can be reproduced and it > > would also satisfy *GPL's requirement of publishing the complete > > sources, too. > > I don't see how this would be much easier than just having URLs in the > metadata that are pointed at (and yes, I'm aware we have to host them). URLs to what? A copy of each of the files listed above to make sure we have a snapshot of every source we used for the build? A pointer to just any version of the spec file won't do. > While I understand what you're trying to accomplish, my gut feeling is > that the depot server is not the right place to host this information. I think it is. To simplify, the depot is for hosting files grouped into packages and nicely versioned so they can be used to construct consistent images. To host the information for rebuilding these packages, we need to host files grouped into packages that are versioned the same way as the binary packages. Laca _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
