Stephen Hahn wrote:
* Shawn Walker <[email protected]> [2009-02-17 18:29]:
Stephen Hahn wrote:
* Shawn Walker <[email protected]> [2009-02-17 17:53]:
to check on the types of the various fields in the authority/0
response. There are a couple of fields that I believe need to be
list-valued, where the current implementation would only consider
a single value for the field as relevant.
Does "current implementation" refer to the authority/0 proposal?
No, it refers to what we have today, prior to authority/0. (As an
example, we only allow a single origin server per authority.) Reading
5871, I'm mostly concerned about why authority_name isn't required,
and by the growing set of booleans.
authority_name would be required information for the repository, but not
in a .p5i file. It doesn't make sense to require the authority_name if
you provide the origin URL since we should be able to retrieve the
authority name from the origin URL. The only problem I can see is that
if the origin URL is for a depot server that doesn't provide the
authority/0 operation, then we have no name for the authority.
Perhaps the right answer is to require the authority name in the .p5i
file, but let any authority/0 response from the server override any of
the single value authority fields provided in the .p5i file.
--
Shawn Walker
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
