[debexpo-devel] SoC report #2

Jonny Lamb jonnylamb at jonnylamb.com
Sun Jun 15 05:09:32 CEST 2008


Hello.

0.03
====

I have just tagged 0.03 in the Git repository. There was only one ticket
open for 0.03, which was to make the repository apt-get'able[0]. This
has been implemented.

No real other exciting news in this department. I also updated a few
more test cases tonight. I still have to write test cases for the
importer script and the new debexpo.lib.repository module.

0. http://debexpo.workaround.org/trac/ticket/5

Keeping Sources/Packages around?
================================

Here is a question that I would be interested in hearing an answer to:

debexpo allow uploads of any distribution, component and section. This
way, one can easily use:

deb-src http://my.reposito.ry/debian mydist mycomp1 mycomp2

This will get /debian/dists/mydist/mycomp{1,2}/source/Sources as normal.
The Sources and Packages files get created by the importer script, which
in turn runs the debexpo.lib.repository.Repository methods. What is
currently set up is that if there are no package or source entries, the
respective file is deleted leaving an empty folder.

I have chosen to do this because if someone uploads a package to
distribution foo, and then removes the package, the Sources/Packages
files will (be empty and) still lay around in the repository, cluttering
up the place. If the files are removed, the directory will be empty, and
therefore will be candidate for deletion by a clean-up script which is
yet to be written..

Anyway, if a package in distribution foo and component bar is uploaded
and someone else uses:

deb http://my.reposito.ry/debian foo bar

then everything will work fine. BUT, if the package is then deleted, so
will the Sources/Packages files, and when the user calls "apt-get
update" it will fail with a horrible 404 error.

So, the question I'm asking is: is it better to leave around empty files
so that users' apt calls will still be nice whilst cluttering up the
repository, or is it better to remove the files and let users have an
error when refreshing package lists?

That's it for now. I will start 0.04 tomorrow. I'm sorry I've been
rather distant and slow with debexpo recently -- the university had its
orchestra-week this week where there were lots of rehearsals every day
leading up to the concert which was last night. That's all out of the
way now though!

Thanks,

-- 
Jonny Lamb, UK                                   jonnylamb at jonnylamb.com
http://jonnylamb.com                                     GPG: 0x2E039402
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://workaround.org/pipermail/debexpo-devel/attachments/20080615/a42ec560/attachment.pgp 


More information about the debexpo-devel mailing list