On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 10:42 +0200, Stephen Benjamin wrote: > On Thu, 2012-09-20 at 15:26 -0500, Jeff Ortel wrote: > > All, > > > > As you know, pulp v2 is packaged into quite a few packages (RPMSs). In > > an effort to make this more manageable for users, we decided to provide > > meta-packages that would bundle the platform packages + RPM support > > packages. We weren't 100% convinced this was the way to go but decided > > to try it anyway. After living with if for a bit, the bad taste in my > > mouth just hasn't gone away and, in fact, has gotten worse with the > > introduction of puppet support. Nothing against the puppet support :) > > If we continue using the meta-packages, users would do wonky things when > > installing a pulp server with both RPM and puppet support. > > > > Like: > > > > # yum install pulp-rpm-server pulp-puppet-server > > > > This /seems/ like they're install two separate servers. > > > > Unless there is objection, I plan to get rid of the meta-packages under > > products/. What does this mean for users? It means that when > > installing pulp, users will install the platform packages + the support > > packages they need. Here is what this will look like: > > > > THE PULP SERVER: > > > > # yum install pulp-server > > > > ... and for RPM support: > > > > # yum install pulp-rpm-plugins > > > > For pulp-admin: > > > > # yum install pulp-admin-client > > > > ... and for RPM support: > > > > # yum install pulp-rpm-admin-extensions > > > > In both cases, yum depsolving does most of the work. > > > > Here is the shortest version of how a user would install a pulp server + > > RPM support & the admin client: > > > > # yum install pulp-rpm-plugins pulp-rpm-admin-extensions > > > > Again, yum depsolving does most of the work. > > > > > > ON THE CONSUMER: > > > > # yum install > > > > ... and for RPM support: > > > > # yum install pulp-rpm-consumer-extensions > > > > For the agent: > > > > # yum install pulp-agent > > > > .. and for RPM support: > > > > # yum install pulp-rpm-handlers > > > > Here is the short version: > > > > # yum install pulp-rpm-consumer-extensions pulp-rpm-handlers > > > > Users can also get creative with yum wildcards. > > > > Still considering package groups in addition to this .... > > > > Thoughts, Objections? > > My first impression as an end-user of pulp is this is overly > complicated, why does it have to be so compartmentalized? I don't know > why you should have to jump through hoops (albeit, small ones) to > install support for RPM repositories. I think that "yum install > pulp-server" should give you a working pulp server with a set of core > functionality, and pulp-consumer should do the same. > > For any automation cases, like in a kickstart or in puppet/chef/cfengine > it's much simpler to specify one package: > > pulp-consumer > > than it would be to have this: > > pulp-consumer-client > pulp-rpm-consumer-extensions > pulp-agent > pulp-rpm-handlers > > Just my $0.02.
In general, comps.xml groups are the preferred way to add convenience for installing groups of packages together. meta-packages are useful if you need to specify specific package versions. For pulp, I would suggest a comps.xml group. -- Dennis _______________________________________________ Pulp-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
