Am 22.12.2010 20:26, schrieb Pierre Schmitz:
I think the core repo and its sign-off policy has proven itself to be a good idea. But we could make a little adjustment to our signoff policy to solve your filesystem package problem.
Agreed.
[core]: This contains everything you need to boot up, connect to the internet and install additional packages from e.g. [extra]
Sorry for being late on this, but this is what I remember from when we redefined the repos - [current] and [extra] was not completely well-defined, so we came up with this (which is mostly what Pierre said): [core] was meant to be the core of Arch, which was supposed to be on the installer. This means: * Packages that are needed to boot (C library, kernel, init scripts, filesystem, system logger, at least one bootloader). * Packages that may be needed to connect to the internet (dhcp client, wireless management tools, pp(t)p, various common VPN clients) - for installing more packages. * Essential package building: default compiler, fakeroot, other support tools for makepkg * Packages for file system management: mkfs and fsck tools for common file systems (this would include btrfs tools, if btrfs is popular enough). * Packages that do not match any of the above criteria, but that virtually anyone will want or need early in the system setup process. The only one I can think of is openssh. * Dependencies (but not necessarily makedepends) of the above. This was never written down this explicitly, but this is how I remember the consensus we made back then. tpowa and andy were iirc two of the driving forces behind the repository transition, I compiled the initial list of packages.
base group: A smaller subset of [core] that include packages that should be installed on every Arch system.
That was the idea. Apart from wpa_supplicant, this is okay the way it is (wpa_supplicant is afaik still in base, but shouldn't be).
base-devel group: Additional packages needed to build our base packages. (This group is indeed questionable and one might consider moving them to [extra]
The idea was to run 'pacman -S base-devel' and have all essential support tools for makepkg. I'd keep them in core - at least gcc will stay in core, unless we want to make two separate PKGBUILDs for gcc and gcc-libs. Having them in core is a good idea, as someone might want to do a core install and makepkg something before being able to continue (to compile an important network access tool).
Everything else in core are packages that are not needed by everybody but required by some to "boot up, connect to the internet and install additional packages"; e.g. file system packages, firmware for your wireless card, wireless_tools etc..
Agreed in principle, but I went into the details more above.
I would suggest to change our policy to this: * packages in the base group and its dependencies still need the usual two sign-off per architecture
One sign-off is implicit by the package builder, so we always had one extra signoff from someone else. I would also only require one sign-off for -any packages, instead of one per architecture.
* sign-offs for all other packages in core are optional; they still need to enter testing first, but can be moved to core without any sign-off after 3 days (or one week or whatever)
Nice idea.
The install CD would than contain the full core repo.
As was originally intended.
What do you think of this proposal?
+1