Am Freitag, 12. Februar 2010 16:40:36 schrieb Stephan Kleine:
On Friday February 12 2010 16:35:14 Lubos Lunak wrote:
On Friday 12 of February 2010, Adrian Schröter wrote:
Am Freitag, 12. Februar 2010 08:54:14 schrieb Christian Trippe:
Hi!
Could you please be so kind to use a different vendor for the KDE:KDE4:Playground repo than for the stable ones?
Reasoning is that with K:K:P added I get updated to beta versions from e.g. Amarok & Ktorrent while being unable to prevent that somehow which currently forces me to constantly enable & disable the repo which is a pita.
JFYI, to fullfill this request, someone has to run
osc signkey --create KDE:KDE4:Playground
the new and own key will lead to an own vendor as well.
I don't understand why we should solve this by having a separate vendor and not e.g. repo priorities. What exactly is the purpose of having a different vendor? It's very likely that we either should not do this or do it for more subrepositories of KDE: .
Priorities are repository wide. So it weren't possible to use e.g. Amarok from K:K:P while sticking to the Ktorrent from K:K:F:D.
Because vendors are set for every package the above usecase weren't a problem with different vendors.
Vendors give the user the chance to decide which version of a package to pick. Also zypper/yast are showing when a package changes the Vendor. So the user has a chance to decide on his own. Vendors are about trust in the end. For example a user might be fine to use $unimportant_small_application from Playground, but he may not be fine to use kdebase from there. bye adrian -- Adrian Schroeter SUSE Linux Products GmbH email: adrian@suse.de -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kde+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-kde+help@opensuse.org