On 16. 3. 2015 at 15:52:10, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
= Proposed Self Contained Change: Disabled Repositories Support =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DisabledRepoSupport
Change owner(s): Richard Hughes <rhughes at redhat dot com>
The Software tool and PackageKit now support disabled repositories to help
users locate software in additional repositories which are not meant to be
enabled by default.
* This Change is announced after the Change Submission Deadline as an
exception to the process. May not be approved for proposed Fedora release. *
== Detailed Description ==
This feature aims to reduce the technical hurdles for users and developers
to locate software packaged for a distribution, but which needs to be
clearly identified as not officially included (or possibly sanctioned) by
that distribution.
When Software (via PackageKit) queries a repo definition that contains the
line enabled_metadata=1, even if the repo is disabled, it will download
repodata. This feature allows a user to locate software in response to a
search. If the user wants to install the software, she receives a dialog
with information that the repo must be enabled to satisfy the request, and
if relevant, information about the nature of the software (for instance, if
it is non- libre).
N.B. This feature does not currently operate in Fedora, since no such repo
definitions are currently shipped. However, the feature could be used by
remixers, and in the future in Fedora in the event of a policy change.
== Scope ==
* Proposal owners: Include enhancements in gnome-software/PackageKit (done)
* Other developers: N/A (not a System Wide Change)
* Release engineering: N/A (not a System Wide Change)
** Note: For this feature to be used in Fedora requires an additional *-
release-extra package to ship disabled repo definition
* Policies and guidelines: N/A (not a System Wide Change)
** Note: For this feature to be used in Fedora requires clearer approval
from FESCo and the Council
I wonder, are there any implications for dnf in terms of being consistent with
the new behavior of Gnome Software? I realize that people using dnf have more
options than people using Gnome Software (--enablerepo for instance) but this
sounds like the beginning of the end of disabled repositories.
Personally, I don't like the semantics of these semi-disabled repos. It beats
the purpose of disabling the repos in the first place, doesn't it? I mean I
don't get why user would specify enabled_metadata=1 when he can achieve almost
the same result with disabled=0 (the only difference I can see is one
additional popup dialog). Or is there something I'm missing?
Thanks
Jan