That was the intent, as presented to me. 1) What you see currently It's not a StarlingX mirror, it's a CentOS/EPEL mirror for use by StarlingX.  The StarlingX specific parts will be added when CENGN can host it's own builds. 2) Allows use of standard reposync tool 3) A new package can be added to StarlingX at any time.  It was likely in test weeks before being accepted using version X.  If version Y is released roughly concurrent with the review of the update that introduces the requirement for X, we might see breakage.  This way X is already available. 4) (speculative) If we ever wanted to consider feature backports (non-security) to release branches, and the feature adds new packages, we may want to use versions that are compatible with that release.   i.e. if the target release for the backport was based on Centos 7.5, but master is on 7.8.  If the backport requires package Y, but Y has a lot of 'Requires'. Do we want the 7.8 version of Y, or the 7.5 version of Y which is sufficient? The 7.8 version would force us to update a lot of other packages, some of which might be patched.  The scope of work, and the risk, for the backport could increase significantly.  Having 7.5 already cached in our mirror means it's ready for use.  It might no longer be available from upstream.  (e.g. EPEL). On 18-11-03 12:21 PM, Cordoba Malibran, Erich wrote:

Hi,

I was taking a look into the mirror recently created and I noticed that is bigger than the needed for StarlingX. It seems to have complete centos mirrors like this[0] or this[1].

For starlingx we only need around 2GB of packages. Does anybody knows the rationale behind this amount of files?

-Erich

[0] http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/centos/centos/vault.centos.org/7.4.1...  [1] http://mirror.starlingx.cengn.ca/mirror/centos/centos/mirror.centos.org/7.5....

_______________________________________________ Starlingx-discuss mailing list Starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss