On Jul 5, 2013, at 2:53 PM, Michael Hrivnak <[email protected]> wrote:
> Robert, > > pulp_deb is definitely incomplete. As far as I know, one of the biggest > blockers for its completion is that python-apt is completely broken in EPEL > and Fedora. Try to "import apt" and watch it explode. The package maintainer > has been mostly MIA, plus it's using a very old version of libapt. > > pulp_deb is a community undertaking that the main Pulp team at Red Hat has > not (yet) worked on. However, we are very interested in supporting anyone who > is interested in working on it, as there is quite a bit of community demand > for it. > > That said, I haven't looked very closely at the code. If you or anyone else > is interested in putting some substantial effort into it, I'd be happy to > talk in detail about what generally needs to be done, and possibly go through > the existing code to see where it stands. You should probably contact Endre > directly to see what his take is on the code's state. > > Lastly, I apologize for our embarrassingly-incorrect python package versions. > Sadly, the versions in our setup.py files have been neglected and in this > case are not at all reliable. That's high on my priority list of things to > fix. > > Thanks for your interest. > > Michael Hrivnak Hi Michael, Thank you for the information. I emailed Endre a few weeks ago, and have not heard back. I will review python-apt and libapt and try to build some updated packages. I began reviewing the code in pulp_deb, and it looks like pulp_deb used pulp_puppet as a template. However, I don't understand some of the conventions, and there isn't any documentation in Endre's repo. Do you think it would be easier to start a new plugin, or to continue working with Endre's code? What is the best way to get started writing a new pulp plugin from scratch? _______________________________________________ Pulp-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
