On January 29, 2014 10:50:32 AM Kevin Fenzi wrote:

> On Mon, 27 Jan 2014 21:28:37 -0500

>

> Shawn Starr <shawn.starr@rogers.com> wrote:

> > Hello folks,

>

> Hey.

>

> > I previously worked with Red Hat on their Red Hat HPC Solution (our

> > original Fork/redo of NPACI Rocks which was.. difficult). It's

> > discontinued now.

> >

> > We had the concept of kits to do metapackages. I have the last CVS

> > snapshot code available for people to examine. I will have to mirror

> > it somewhere as my laptop as a VM/web server can only handle so much

> > bandwidth :)

> >

> > The concept was this:

> >

> > kit-something ---> pulls in: kit-client-configs / kit-server-configs

> > <--- pulls in RPM dependencies for packages. Kits == Roles basically.

> >

> > Now, we didn't have comps.xml to work with but we could maybe do

> > something like: We have a roles.xml which maps to comps.xml groups.

> >

> > So, then "Fedora Server Role" maps to X groups in comps.xml which

> > pulls in the direct RPM dependencies.

> >

> > The "Fedora Server Role" RPM/whatever can have then its own "turn

> > key" configuration template/setup files for the groups it pulls in to

> > configure them out-of-the-box.

> >

> > so:

> >

> > role-something ---> pulls in: role-client-configs /

> > role-server-configs <--- pulls in comps.xml group package RPM

> > dependencies as part of each grouping

> >

> > That way, we dont break existing users where a Desktop also contains

> > server configurations (comps.xml -> RPM dependencies only) and we

> > gain the ability to have a higher-level grouping which adds on

> > turn-key meta configurations that are *optional*.

> >

> > So its a one way-dependency mapping and both use cases win!

> >

> > Thoughts?

>

> metapackages have a number of issues... see the cons section of:

> http://yum.baseurl.org/wiki/YumGroupsOverview

>

> In the case of just a 'fedora-server-freeipa' role, they make sense to

> me, as if someone removes a specific package that this role needs, it

> would remove the role package, which is fine, since they would no

> longer be using the role.

>

> I'm not sure what deeper level you are suggesting here, can you provide

> a more detailed example?

>

> kevin

 

 

Hi Kevin,

 

I've uploaded the original Red Hat HPC Solution source (the last snapshot of code I had)to Fedora People, you can browse it here:

http://spstarr.fedorapeople.org/ocs-rhhpc/trunk/src/

 

The kits concept is shown in the .spec files and how we did plugins / meta configurations.

 

Thanks,

Shawn