On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 20:11:47 -0500, James wrote:
On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 00:14 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 20:19:48 -0800, Jesse wrote:
>
> > Extras had significantly fewer packages,
>
> Well, Fedora Extras 6 (x86_64) contained 5129 packages, which is only 300 less
> than F11 stable updates.
>
>
http://archive.fedoraproject.org/pub/archive/fedora/linux/extras/6/x86_64...
*sigh*
No need to do that.
I almost managed to not respond to any of these threads today.
Anyway (trying to say just the facts):
% yum repolist --releasever=11 updates
repo id repo name status
updates Fedora 11 - x86_64 - Updates 9,390
repolist: 9,390
So what? That's not twice as much as FE6, which would not have taken
several hours to push into such a repo. Not even when running repoclosure
on the needsign repo prior to pushing and when updating repoview pages
afterwards. Simply because the code that was used worked very differently
than "mash".
...and it's only ~65% done. That also doesn't take into
account the fact
that we've released ~17k F11 updates, which I'm pretty sure didn't
happen for F6 extras.
What are you trying to point out? Not everything is better or more convenient
with the current push/compose infrastructure.