On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 09:04:06 +0100 Tom K wrote:

Travis Willard wrote:

...

On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 11:36:02 -0400 "Travis Willard" wrote:

...

Any thoughts or suggestions, just reply to this thread. :)

Actually, anyone have any issues with my putting them in unstable? That seems to make the most sense, after thinking about it.

If there's no comments in the next 12h or so I'll go ahead and upload them - I don't think there'll be much of a problem with it.

-- Travis

Uh, an observation. I've always understood that unstable package names should not clash with names in other repos - hence, mplayer-svn, gimp-devel, etc. This is certainly what we say on the relevant wiki page: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Official_Repositories and it is also this convention that allows us to state, also on that page, that enabling the unstable repo is safe, because unstable packages will never overwrite current/extra packages. Finally, it allows those who decide to use unstable to install the packages with the standard pacman -Sy foo, rather than the slightly clunkier pacman -Sy repo/foo.

Sorry I missed the 12h cut-off, btw - all kinds of crap going wrong around here. :)

Tom.

Yeah, Eric emailed me directly about this - I guess I bungled that. I'll think up a fancy name for the unstable packages and re-do 'em. -- Travis

Bah, the more I think about this, the less I want to pollute the package namespace (and replaces, conflicts, provides entries on fglrx* packages) with some gimpy name like fglrx-unstable, and I'd rather just make a custom repo and be done with it. "Early-adopters" have had their shot at a package in unstable. ;)

Is it OK if I host a custom repo for the new fglrx in my public_html dir on gerolde? I don't have any better place to put it.

Hmm... I guess it depends on how much usage you expect it to get. If you are expecting alot of bandwidth to be used, then we could probably put it in the ftp folder under /other/. Please don't put it in the root of ftp though.. However, I really think unstable is the right place to put packages that need testing though. I mean... what else will it be used for if not for new packages to test? What benefit does a custom folder have over unstable?

On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 12:05:15 +0300 "Roman Kyrylych" wrote:

2007/9/16, eliott :

...

...

Bah, the more I think about this, the less I want to pollute the package namespace (and replaces, conflicts, provides entries on fglrx* packages) with some gimpy name like fglrx-unstable, and I'd rather just make a custom repo and be done with it. "Early-adopters" have had their shot at a package in unstable. ;)

Is it OK if I host a custom repo for the new fglrx in my public_html dir on gerolde? I don't have any better place to put it.

Hmm... I guess it depends on how much usage you expect it to get.

If you are expecting alot of bandwidth to be used, then we could probably put it in the ftp folder under /other/. Please don't put it in the root of ftp though..

However, I really think unstable is the right place to put packages that need testing though. I mean... what else will it be used for if not for new packages to test?

What benefit does a custom folder have over unstable?

Well, unstable names aren't supposed to clash with names in extra - if they stay in unstable, I need to rename them. I'd rather not make up some gimpy name for them, because then I'd have to add that to replaces and conflicts in the next release of the drivers that went to [extra], which is kinda ugly for a one-shot thing. A custom repo'd allow me to use the same names.

...

They are not CVS/SVN/etc. version. /me wonders - why don't put them in Testing?

Well, I suppose it could work - but they'd never leave testing, so it seems kind of odd I guess. Thinking about it, I suppose that would make the most sense if I wanted it in one of the 'official' repos. Also, if I were to put them into testing, I'd have to do a CVS checkin into [extra], and I'm not sure where we stand with checkins to extra yet due to the core repo stuff. -- Travis