#9 vendors done right (including dist-git namespace extension)
Closed: Invalid 6 years ago Opened 7 years ago by lkocman.

Hi Guys,

I was just talking to Miroslav Suchy and he was asking about how do we solve following problem:

msuchy and hhorak wants to work on their own implementation of a module myapp (not necessarily at same time).

msuchy's myapp and hhorak's myapp might not necessarily have a same purpose or api so keeping it in different branches might be a problem.

Such an example is application chromium in rpms namespace. Where it used to be a game and now it's a web browser, both live in different branches within the same git repo. I consider this very bad approach.

Modulemd is simple right? We just introduce "vendor" attr with some reasonable default (e.g. fm). However how do we correctly handle this in dist-git and possibly other tools as well?

Koji could use :vendor string in tag / repo
pungi could use some sort of repo prefix
pdc would carry vendor attribute for variant.

I'm short on ideas with dist-git, since I don't consider myself to be a dist-git expert. Perhaps srv/modules/namespace|vendor:repo or use another level like /srv/modules/vendor/module.

Thoughts?

Lubos


Yeah, we've been pondering the need for a vendor-like tag from the beginning.

I think such a tag should be set by the project buildsystem. For instance, every Fedora module would feature a "Fedora" vendor tag, while COPR modules would have something like "copr/contyk".

The user shouldn't worry about this and shouldn't enter it manually. It should just happen for them.

I'm going to close this now. So far we haven't had an actual need for it and when it happens, we will figure out something that fits the workflow :)

Metadata Update from @psabata:
- Issue close_status updated to: Invalid
- Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)

6 years ago

Login to comment on this ticket.

Metadata