Re: Zero day updates upstream

----- "Karanbir Singh" <mail-listskaran.org> wrote:
> 
> Just talking to Lance and Johnny online, and we feel
the best way 
> forward might be to add an Media-Updates/ repo on the
iso's itself - 
> then list both the local media updates as well as
mirror.centos.org 
> updates repo's in the anaconda screen, both disabled.
> 
> We feel this gives us the max wins in each direction (
but will
> slightly increase the data size on the last cd, as
packages from cd-1
> will move to cd-2 etc.
> 
> I will still try and ensure that a minimum install is
possible using 
> only cd-1, but cant promise that.
> 
> - KB

+1 to this if we can still produce a single-CD minimal
install.  IMO the value if a one-disc install is higher than
the value of a release that contains the initial update set.
 In a month or two there will be additional updates to apply
anyway, so it doesn't seem prudent to sacrifice the one-disc
install for the life of the release to gain a (very) small
convenience up front.  Just my .02

---
C. Halstead <chrissourcelabs.com>
SourceLabs - http://www.sourcelabs.com
Dependable Open Source Systems

_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-develcentos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel

C. Halstead wrote:
> ----- "Karanbir Singh" <mail-listskaran.org> wrote:
>> Just talking to Lance and Johnny online, and we
feel the best way 
>> forward might be to add an Media-Updates/ repo on
the iso's itself - 
>> then list both the local media updates as well as
mirror.centos.org 
>> updates repo's in the anaconda screen, both
disabled.
>>
>> We feel this gives us the max wins in each
direction ( but will
>> slightly increase the data size on the last cd, as
packages from cd-1
>> will move to cd-2 etc.
>>
>> I will still try and ensure that a minimum install
is possible using 
>> only cd-1, but cant promise that.
>>
>> - KB
> 
> +1 to this if we can still produce a single-CD minimal
install.  IMO the value if a one-disc install is higher than
the value of a release that contains the initial update set.
 In a month or two there will be additional updates to apply
anyway, so it doesn't seem prudent to sacrifice the one-disc
install for the life of the release to gain a (very) small
convenience up front.  Just my .02
> 
> ---

if we can get a few more people voting this way, then I feel
we have a 
decision on this issue.

- KB

-- 
Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ :
2522219icq
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-develcentos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel

Karanbir Singh spake the following on 3/16/2007 9:44 AM:
> C. Halstead wrote:
>> ----- "Karanbir Singh"
>> <mail-listskaran.org> wrote:
>>> Just talking to Lance and Johnny online, and we
feel the best way
>>> forward might be to add an Media-Updates/ repo
on the iso's itself -
>>> then list both the local media updates as well
as mirror.centos.org
>>> updates repo's in the anaconda screen, both
disabled.
>>>
>>> We feel this gives us the max wins in each
direction ( but will
>>> slightly increase the data size on the last cd,
as packages from cd-1
>>> will move to cd-2 etc.
>>>
>>> I will still try and ensure that a minimum
install is possible using
>>> only cd-1, but cant promise that.
>>>
>>> - KB
>>
>> +1 to this if we can still produce a single-CD
minimal install.  IMO
>> the value if a one-disc install is higher than the
value of a release
>> that contains the initial update set.  In a month
or two there will be
>> additional updates to apply anyway, so it doesn't
seem prudent to
>> sacrifice the one-disc install for the life of the
release to gain a
>> (very) small convenience up front.  Just my .02
>>
>> ---
> 
> if we can get a few more people voting this way, then I
feel we have a
> decision on this issue.
> 
> - KB
> 
I have to say that keeping as much upstream compatibility as
possible is a
good thing. Fixing the broken things is good, and I know
that the CentOS team
has probably fixed some bugs that upstream is appreciative
of.
But changing the release CD's might turn into a nightmare
for the maintainers.
Do you do it just for the initial release?
How about for the next rollup?
And after that, what?

If you see a critical bug that a package will fix, adding it
would be a plus,
as was the i586 installer you added. But keep the upstream
compatibility where
you can. It will make passing bug reports up the chain a
little easier.
"Even though you have to cook your own food, you are
still eating at their
table for free"

-- 

MailScanner is like deodorant...
You hope everybody uses it, and
you notice quickly if they don't!!!!

_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-develcentos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel

On 3/16/07, C. Halstead <chrissourcelabs.com> wrote:
> +1 to this if we can still produce a single-CD minimal
install.  IMO the value if a one-disc install is higher than
the value of a release that contains the initial update set.
 In a month or two there will be additional updates to apply
anyway, so it doesn't seem prudent to sacrifice the one-disc
install for the life of the release to gain a (very) small
convenience up front.  Just my .02


Can I change my vote to this one?
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-develcentos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel

On Mar 16, 2007, at 12:44 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
> C. Halstead wrote:
>> ----- "Karanbir Singh" <mail-listskaran.org> wrote:
>>> Just talking to Lance and Johnny online, and we
feel the best way  
>>> forward might be to add an Media-Updates/ repo
on the iso's  
>>> itself - then list both the local media updates
as well as  
>>> mirror.centos.org updates repo's in the
anaconda screen, both  
>>> disabled.
>>>
>>> We feel this gives us the max wins in each
direction ( but will
>>> slightly increase the data size on the last cd,
as packages from  
>>> cd-1
>>> will move to cd-2 etc.
>>>
>>> I will still try and ensure that a minimum
install is possible  
>>> using only cd-1, but cant promise that.
>>>
>>> - KB
>> +1 to this if we can still produce a single-CD
minimal install.   
>> IMO the value if a one-disc install is higher than
the value of a  
>> release that contains the initial update set.  In a
month or two  
>> there will be additional updates to apply anyway,
so it doesn't  
>> seem prudent to sacrifice the one-disc install for
the life of the  
>> release to gain a (very) small convenience up
front.  Just my .02
>> ---
>
> if we can get a few more people voting this way, then I
feel we  
> have a decision on this issue.
>
> - KB

  I am agreeable to this, but I would actually prefer to
simply mimic  
upstream -- release 5.0 with the same base pacakges as
upstream, and  
provide necessary updates in the updates repo.  I don't see
a strong  
reason to spend time modifying the CD images to contain a
few package  
updates that are easily downloaded after install time.

If you proceed with the suggestion you mentioned above, are
you  
implying that the so called "zero day updates"
will appear in both  
the "media-updates" repo on the CD, and in the
official updates repo  
on the FTP & mirrors?

-Jeff
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-develcentos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel