Danek Duvall wrote:
Bart Smaalders wrote:
Should disabled publishers be made non-sticky, or should we
just leave them alone? I'm now thinking the latter is better
if we're going for least surprise.
You can't add anything from a disabled publisher -- you can't even assume
that there's anything listening at the origin or any mirrors. That sounds
like it has to be non-sticky. Though stickiness should be restored when
the publisher is re-enabled.
The question is whether disabling a specific publisher means its safe to
suddenly switch out its packages for another publisher's.
Specifically, if you disable a publisher, which makes it non-sticky,
then its packages can be replaced by another's. Then, when it is
re-enabled, all of those packages that were switched to a new publisher
won't go back to the old one...
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
