[arch-dev-public] definition of the core repo, putting nilfs-utils, btrfs-progs and dosfstools in core
pierre at archlinux.de
Wed Dec 22 14:26:03 EST 2010
On Wed, 22 Dec 2010 19:14:19 +0100, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:
> I realise I just suggested some pretty radical changes, but in my mind
> they make a lot of sense. I hope I didn't miss some obvious
> downsides (please point them out), I will (and I hope you do too)
> spend some nights pondering about this.
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.
[core]: This contains everything you need to boot up, connect to the
internet and install additional packages from e.g. [extra]
base group: A smaller subset of [core] that include packages that
should be installed on every Arch system.
base-devel group: Additional packages needed to build our base
packages. (This group is indeed questionable and one might consider
moving them to [extra]
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..
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
* 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)
The install CD would than contain the full core repo.
What do you think of this proposal?
Pierre Schmitz, https://users.archlinux.de/~pierre
More information about the arch-dev-public