The Playground Repository gives contributors a place to host packages that are not up to the standards of the main Fedora Repository but may still be useful to other users. For now the playground repository contains both packages that are destined for eventual inclusion into the main Fedora Repositories and packages that are never going to make it there. Users of the repository should be willing to endure a certain amount of instability to use packages from here.
- Packages must follow the [Legal: | Legal Guidelines]. In particular, the license for all packages must be approved in the Legal Guidelines.
- Packages must not conflict with or replace packages in the Main Fedora Repository.
- Packages must not conflict with or replace other packages in the Playground Repository.
- Packages may violate other Fedora Packaging Guidelines.
How the repository will work
Packages for the repository are built in copr. The copr owner can mark the repository as a whole as being part of the Playground Repository. Packages successfully built for marked copr's are copied into the Playground Repository.
|Groups to Coordinate with||How necessary||Need|
|Infra||Necessary||Disk space for the yum repositories (Open question -- is this mirrored?)|
|Infra/Copr devs||Very nice to have||Copr deployment that's considered reliable enough to build packages for this repo|
|Copr devs||Necessary||Ability to mark an individual copr for inclusion in the playground repository|
We'll need to answer these questions and by their answers, flesh out the [#Description] and add additional work items to the [#Identified_needs] section.
- how do updates work (rolling? bodhi? Will we constantly be regenerating the repodata [like the rawhide build repo?])
- is there a testing repo?
- does it need adding to mirrormanager?
- will fedup support upgrades with packages there?
- Does it need to be mashed in order to get multilib support?
- self hosting (all packages needed to build the packages are in the repo)?
- Is there any review of repos/packages in the repos?
- Does the review differ depending on who is building the package (cla+1 vs in the packager group)?