Re: ansible1.9 package

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 11/04/2017 08:35 AM, Felix Schwarz wrote:
> 
> Am 03.11.2017 um 16:09 schrieb Stephen John Smoogen:
>> OK how can we better explain this in the future?
> 
> I don't think there is an easy solution with "just another mail to -announce"
> or so. Personally I don't find it really practical scanning a mailing list for
> relevant packages (and filtering all the messages which might be "noise" to me
> because I don't use these packages).
> 
> One important thing why I'm using Fedora (and not a rolling release distro) is
> that I want to have specific points in time when I can prepare for bigger
> fallout (Fedora releases). This means EPEL could aim to introduce actual
> "releases" (e.g. every 3 months or so).
> 
> Breaking updates would be pushed only at these times (unless there is a
> *really* good reason). This could involve also writing some release notes
> (e.g. the packager could tick a box "breaking update" and submit a note which
> is then added to the release notes).
> 
> Currently EPEL is basically a "rolling release" distro which is probably the
> opposite of what RHEL/CentOS users are looking for.

We have talked about doing this kind of thing in the past, but... it's a
ton more work (you have to have releng folks do a bunch of work every 3
months or whatever) and we could never agree on the timing. Is it just
randomly every 3 months? everytime a new RHEL minor is out? Every time a
new CentOS minor is out?

> The second big thing to me is that the "support policy" for each package is
> not easily discoverable (as far as I know). I suspect it might be especially
> helpful if there are some kind of "categories" so you grasp the policy very
> quickly (e.g. "inline with upstream stable", "switch when package is EOLd
> upstream", "2 years", "just a few months").

While all the modularity work in Fedora is all early days and up in the
air, this may be something we get "for free" from it. Branches now have
a SLA in Fedora, we should be able to leverage that and expose it better
to users. Of course everything may change with modules, it's really
early to tell. We may be able to make different modules with different
SLAs...

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

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora News]     [Fedora Cloud]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Education]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Scitech]     [Fedora Robotics]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Infrastructure]     [Fedora Websites]     [Anaconda Devel]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora Fonts]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Management Tools]     [Fedora Mentors]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [SSH]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora R Devel]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kickstart]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Centos]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Fedora Legal]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora QA]     [Fedora Triage]     [Fedora OCaml]     [Coolkey]     [Virtualization Tools]     [ET Management Tools]     [Yum Users]     [Tux]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Apps]     [Gnome Users]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [Maemo Users]     [Asterisk PBX]     [Fedora Sparc]     [Fedora Universal Network Connector]     [Fedora ARM]

  Powered by Linux