[Yum] Re: pkgpolicy=(newest)|first|last by repo order in .conf

[Michael Stenner]

On Thu, May 27, 2004 at 03:11:23PM -0400, seth vidal wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-05-27 at 15:08 -0400, Cymon J. Cox wrote:
> > On Wed, 2004-05-26 at 11:52, Cymon J. Cox wrote:
> > Of course, a directory of rep.conf's should be prioritised (-able) by a
> > user defined repo-id, but isnt this a separate issue?
> > 
> > Unless I'm missing something (and I havent read the cvs code), a
> > serverlist ordered by repoconfid then by repo-stanza position would still
> > make more sense to the user here than the current implementation.
> 
> Why? The current implementation is documented and fairly
> straightforward. With the introduction of a repo.d dir the order in the
> file becomes very muddy.
> 
> easier to have a consistent standard that is obviously applied across
> all repositories.

I think I agree with Seth on this.  I would probably not design it
this way from scratch, but the history kinda puts me over the edge.
The real technical advantage is this:

With alphabetic repo sorting, there is only one layer of sorting.  In
contrast, sorting by priority means you have two layers of _different_
sorting:  1) repos are sorted by appearance.  OK, what about conf.d
files?  2) oh, they're sorted alphabetically.

					-Michael

-- 
  Michael D. Stenner                            mstenner at ece.arizona.edu
  ECE Department, the University of Arizona                 520-626-1619
  1230 E. Speedway Blvd., Tucson, AZ 85721-0104                 ECE 524G