Ah thanks, I ended up finding the 1.9.6-2 version on a mirror that hadn't been updated yet. Seems to work fine.
On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 9:09 AM, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 3 November 2017 at 00:09, Peter Rex <prex5609@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Security flaws mean nothing to the application I use Ansible for, but
> stability does. Control servers are in private networks, and they configure
> equipment guarded by murderous thugs, so no problem there.
>
> The control servers don't get updated that often, but when they do, it's not
> good if things stop working, because, you know, the equipment they configure
> is owned by people who employ murderous thugs to guard it. Kind of a
> problem.
>
> We originally looked at Ansible and thought, OK, Red Hat, nothing more
> stable than that. Ansible, flagship product. It seemed like a good bet, but
> turned out not to be, that Red Hat wasn't likely to deprecate a major
> version of a software package during the lifetime of one of its operating
> systems, in this case EL6. Given how much of a moving target Ansible has
> turned out to be, I definitely should have subscribed to epel-announce, to,
> you know, minimize the chance of getting murdered, but here we are.
>
OK how can we better explain this in the future? There seems to be
some sort of misunderstanding that EPEL is giving the same guarentees
as a paid for product from Red Hat. I can understand the grumpiness if
you had gotten this under Red Hat contract support and things got
bumped. In that case you are paying Red Hat to do that work of keeping
software around for N years or it is clear in the contract that this
software is not considered 'long term supported'.
In any case you can get a hold of ansible1.9 from
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID= 690794
--
> Anyhow, thanks for the feedback.
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Kevin Fenzi <kevin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On 11/02/2017 11:03 AM, Peter Rex wrote:
>> > Thanks for the info, Ricardo. Hadn't found the retirement notice.
>> > Security,
>> > I guess. I can't resist saying, though, that I regret using Ansible and
>> > my
>> > assumption that one of the Es in EPEL stood for Enterprise. Oh well,
>> > live
>> > and learn.
>>
>> Sorry things didn't work out as you would have liked.
>>
>> ansible1.9 was always intended as a short term 'bridge' to help give
>> folks more time to migrate to 2.0. When upstream stopped supporting it,
>> we retired it in EPEL as well. ansible is very very fast moving and
>> complex and there's no way we could backport even security fixes to an
>> out of date 1.9 version. Sorry.
>>
>> You can of course still use 1.9 if you wish, just realize that it
>> doesn't get any bugfixes or security updates.
>>
>> kevin
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
>
Stephen J Smoogen.
_______________________________________________
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
_______________________________________________ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
