On 08/04/2017 12:37 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: >>>>>> "KF" == Kevin Fenzi <kevin@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > KF> I don't think we have any way to find out the version of a package > KF> in all channels. At least I don't know of such a way. So, I think we > KF> should concern ourselves with only the channels that EPEL says it > KF> will try and not conflict with. > > I don't even know what those are, really. All I know is what I can > extract from those json files, and what CentOS has. Certainly limiting > things to what EPEL can see is the only reasonable way; I was just > trying to hedge against the fact that I can't see what's in The json files we provide are the exact channels that epel uses and tries not to collide with. RHEL has hundreds (thousands?) of other channels we don't look at. > KF> So, yeah, we would need to make sure and retire the epel package as > KF> soon as rhel started providing a source package with the same name. > > I think it is somewhat unlikely that RHEL would begin providing any > python2-X source packages where they currently provide python-X source > packages. I guess it's possible, though, and it's something we'd have > to deal with immediately if it ever happens. However, it shouldn't > cause issues for end-user systems in that case, only the EPEL builders, > and for those the fix is very quick (block in koji and wait for a newrepo). Yep. > KF> I'm in favor... lets give it a try with some of the common ones. :) > > Thanks; I have a list of four I'm starting with, listed at the end of > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Tibbs/EPELPythonStubPackages > > I hope that once in this will make life easier for someone. Indeed. Thanks for working on this. kevin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
