Hello, This currently is not set in stone, so now is the time to talk about it. With RHEL5 beta2 Redhat has divided up their different products into different repositories, each in it's own directory. So under /rhel5/i386 you have the directories Client Cluster ClusterStorage Server VT Workstation This makes it easy for them to sell someone a package, they get a key, and depending on what the key is, certain repositories are available. But to distributions like us, well, it's not what we're used to. Preliminary discussions on whiteboards between Connie and I have shown 3 ways that we can proceed. Each has it's Pro's and Con's. 1 - Do just what Red Hat does. Directories: /Client /Cluster /ClusterStorage /Server /VT /Workstation Pro: Just like RedHat Con: Duplication of pacakges in /Client and /Server Hard for Users to find packages by hand Hard for developers to figure out where to put packages Why have them in separate directories when we will include them all 2 - Follow RedHat, but combine similar packages from Client and Server Directories: /ClientServer /Client /Cluster /ClusterStorage /Server /VT /Workstation Pro: Almost like RedHat No duplication of packages Con: Hard for Users to find packages by hand Hard for developers to figure out where to put packages Why have them in separate directories when we will include them all 3 - Mush everything into our normal directory structure Directories: /SL /contrib /sites Pro: Easy for users to find packages Easy for developers to know where to put packages No duplication of packages Makes more logical sense Con: Have to combine all the comps.xml files, each time we have a release People used to regular RedHat might be a bit confused Will require more anaconda changes My personal opinion, and I'm willing to be disagreed with. I want to go with option 3. Troy -- __________________________________________________ Troy Dawson [log in to unmask] (630)840-6468 Fermilab ComputingDivision/CSS CSI Group __________________________________________________