[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] Introduction of "rpms.lock.yaml" file (Discussion #2908)

[Erik Skultety]

> Should there be a separate type for debuginfo though?

 Yes, there should be.

> The type attribute is an interesting idea. If you had a repo that mixes both types of files, you would need to list it twice (each time with different type), but nothing about the format prevents that. 

While there certainly are (usually small 3rd party) repos that mix everything, is that something to cause a concern? I mean, if you as a provider of a lockfile intend to get the best results, you need to opt in to do things right and IMO separate files given their intended category/use case for clean book keeping, otherwise I'd compare it to the "sink" repo case where all packages not belonging to a dedicated repo with a repoid would end up - however, in case of the file mix, one would not be able to specify what needs to be prefetched and everything would be prefetched. @lubomir maybe I'm misinterpreting why the default `type: rpm` is a problem if one mixes everything in a single repo? What is the expectation there?

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/discussions/2908#discussioncomment-8467487
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <rpm-software-management/rpm/repo-discussions/2908/comments/8467487 at github.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-maint/attachments/20240214/680c18cc/attachment.html>