ArchServer Project :: Forums

Just so that everybody knows what wiki page you are talking about:

http://wiki.archserver.org/index.php/Repo_Organization

Awesome, I think it looks good

Also, I changed this page too.
http://wiki.archserver.org/index.php/Ar … ifferences

Last edited by LoneStar (2010-Jan-08 12:03:38)

I love this discussion... You guys have sorted everything out wonderfully while I've been relaxing on the beach on Daydream Island

I agree with the outcome of the discussion -- essentially taking the AL repos, and prepending "server-" to the name. The only thing that no-one has mentioned is release names. I'm in favour of releases just being handled by the path in pacman.conf or mirrorlist such as:

ftp://repo.archserver.org/redgum/server-base/os/i686/   # Redgum Release
ftp://repo.archserver.org/spruce/server-base/os/i686/   # Spruce Release

This will save having different .db.tar.gz filenames in each repo for each release which saves added complication to the repo-management scripts used by the TU's   (KISS!)

If everyone is happy with the current status of the repo organisation as per the wiki, I will start making the changes on the server and in git to rename/move everything appropriately.

triplem wrote:

+1, but the repository is called server-core, isn't it?

We want to change back to have the same core/base meanings as AL?

ie core = repo, base = group

I'm for keeping AL's naming just because it might be confusing if we didn't.