On 10/11/30 00:29 -0500, andre999 wrote:
My point is that a sandbox will facilitate proper support. Which
would be facilitated by keeping the 2 sets of free repositories.
And restricting what should be considered core.
We both know that Mandriva is moving in that direction. Evidently
On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 11:16:57PM +0100, Maarten Vanraes wrote:
Op zaterdag 27 november 2010 22:07:43 schreef Michael scherer:
On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 08:23:59PM +0200, Thomas Backlund wrote:
Jerome Quelin skrev 27.11.2010 19:11:
On 10/11/27 17:59 +0100, Maarten Vanraes wrote:
and,
On dimanche 28 novembre 2010 at 21:12, Thomas Backlund wrote :
So the mirror medias accordingly to all comments so far would be a
simple:
* core
- enabled by default
- mirrors must mirror this media to be listed as a mirror
- only GPL stuff
I guess you meant free (as defined by
On Sunday 28 November 2010 23:10:34 Thomas Backlund wrote:
[...]
Would it be possible to have a separate games sub-project, that won't
freeze to make releases with the rest of mageia?
Instead it would be an always updating repos which is compiled with the
latest stable release (or even the
Le dimanche 28 novembre 2010 à 22:12 +0200, Thomas Backlund a écrit :
So the mirror medias accordingly to all comments so far would be a simple:
* core
- enabled by default
- mirrors must mirror this media to be listed as a mirror
- only GPL stuff
- must be selfcontained
*
On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 8:06 PM, Olivier Thauvin
nanar...@nanardon.zarb.org wrote:
I can't agree with the mirrors are free to not mirror this media,
three reasons:
The tainted repository is analogous to the current PLF repository, no?
Why can't Mageia handle it the same way? Then it does
Op maandag 29 november 2010 01:24:42 schreef Michael scherer:
On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 08:00:17PM +0200, Thomas Backlund wrote:
Michael scherer skrev 27.11.2010 10:43:
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 10:29:14PM +0200, Thomas Backlund wrote:
[...]
Then we come to the problematic part:
This
Op maandag 29 november 2010 02:06:13 schreef Olivier Thauvin:
* Thomas Backlund (t...@iki.fi) wrote:
So the mirror medias accordingly to all comments so far would be a
simple:
* core
- enabled by default
- mirrors must mirror this media to be listed as a mirror
- only GPL
Op maandag 29 november 2010 01:51:38 schreef Michael Scherer:
Le dimanche 28 novembre 2010 à 22:12 +0200, Thomas Backlund a écrit :
So the mirror medias accordingly to all comments so far would be a
simple:
* core
- enabled by default
- mirrors must mirror this media to be
* Maarten Vanraes (maarten.vanr...@gmail.com) wrote:
Op maandag 29 november 2010 01:24:42 schreef Michael scherer:
So if we decide mirrors will not handle the load, so we need to split
games, then we should also say mirrors will not handle the load, so we
need to do less iso/offer to not
2010/11/27 Ahmad Samir ahmadsamir3...@gmail.com:
IMHO, the mirrorlist in its current status should be dropped
altogether... it's only good if the user has good mirrors near where
he lives, otherwise it just fails miserably. The whole point of using
a mirrorlist was that urpmi will switch to
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 10:29:14PM +0200, Thomas Backlund wrote:
Hi,
As we are getting closer to actually have something to mirror it's
time to get this decided.
And the deadline for theese discussions is December 5th, 2010 in
order to get a decision on the board meeting on December 6th,
2010/11/27 Maarten Vanraes maarten.vanr...@gmail.com:
if a mirror doesn't have some repositories, it should fetch the next one.
In this case there has to be some kind of selection dialogue on the
user side to determine which repositories the user wants to set up. No
need to let urpmi go to the
Op zaterdag 27 november 2010 14:21:28 schreef Wolfgang Bornath:
2010/11/27 Maarten Vanraes maarten.vanr...@gmail.com:
if a mirror doesn't have some repositories, it should fetch the next one.
In this case there has to be some kind of selection dialogue on the
user side to determine which
On 10/11/27 17:59 +0100, Maarten Vanraes wrote:
i agree, the less repositories the easier it'll be.
however, core is for all the maintained packages, extra is for the
unmaintained packages that build ok.
what is a maintained package? no maintainer, no commits since x
months, not buildable?
Op zaterdag 27 november 2010 18:11:36 schreef Jerome Quelin:
On 10/11/27 17:59 +0100, Maarten Vanraes wrote:
i agree, the less repositories the easier it'll be.
however, core is for all the maintained packages, extra is for the
unmaintained packages that build ok.
what is a maintained
Jerome Quelin skrev 27.11.2010 19:11:
On 10/11/27 17:59 +0100, Maarten Vanraes wrote:
i agree, the less repositories the easier it'll be.
however, core is for all the maintained packages, extra is for the
unmaintained packages that build ok.
what is a maintained package? no maintainer, no
On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 08:23:59PM +0200, Thomas Backlund wrote:
Jerome Quelin skrev 27.11.2010 19:11:
On 10/11/27 17:59 +0100, Maarten Vanraes wrote:
what are the rules to move a package from extra to core, and vice-versa?
who can do it? will it be done automatically? will this imply a
Hi,
As we are getting closer to actually have something to mirror it's time
to get this decided.
And the deadline for theese discussions is December 5th, 2010 in
order to get a decision on the board meeting on December 6th, 2010.
Now this is a somewhat problematic topic but needs to be
Renaud MICHEL skrev 26.11.2010 23:43:
On vendredi 26 novembre 2010 at 21:29, Thomas Backlund wrote :
Then we come to the problematic part:
--
x86_64
media
codecs (disabled by default)
core (old main+contrib)
backports (disabled by
Op vrijdag 26 november 2010 22:43:31 schreef Renaud MICHEL:
On vendredi 26 novembre 2010 at 21:29, Thomas Backlund wrote :
Then we come to the problematic part:
--
x86_64
media
codecs (disabled by default)
core (old main+contrib)
Op zaterdag 27 november 2010 00:25:17 schreef Thomas Backlund:
[...]
A) i see no reason for codecs and firmware to be separate. However, i do
understand that some people would not want to install firmware, but i
think we should do this in another way, (like installing a meta package
that
On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 00:44, Maarten Vanraes
maarten.vanr...@gmail.com wrote:
Op zaterdag 27 november 2010 00:25:17 schreef Thomas Backlund:
[...]
A) i see no reason for codecs and firmware to be separate. However, i do
understand that some people would not want to install firmware, but i
Op zaterdag 27 november 2010 00:51:59 schreef Romain d'Alverny:
On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 00:44, Maarten Vanraes
maarten.vanr...@gmail.com wrote:
Op zaterdag 27 november 2010 00:25:17 schreef Thomas Backlund:
[...]
A) i see no reason for codecs and firmware to be separate. However, i
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 11:29 PM, Thomas Backlund t...@iki.fi wrote:
The idea of this layout with some of the separate sections (codecs,
firmware, games, non-free, debug_*) gives a mirror maintainer in a country
(or company) the option to exclude the parts they legally (or by company
policy)
2010/11/27 Andrey Borzenkov arvidj...@gmail.com:
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 11:29 PM, Thomas Backlund t...@iki.fi wrote:
The idea of this layout with some of the separate sections (codecs,
firmware, games, non-free, debug_*) gives a mirror maintainer in a country
(or company) the option to
On 27 November 2010 08:27, Andrey Borzenkov arvidj...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 11:29 PM, Thomas Backlund t...@iki.fi wrote:
The idea of this layout with some of the separate sections (codecs,
firmware, games, non-free, debug_*) gives a mirror maintainer in a country
(or
101 - 127 of 127 matches
Mail list logo
