Re: Continuing playground discussion

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

 



On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 03:13:00PM -0700, Troy Dawson wrote:
> We were having a good discussion about epel8-playground in the
> Steering Committee meeting this week.  Since we ran out of time I'd
> like to continue it via email.
> 
> Most everyone agreed that playground is currently a bit of a mess and
> it's hard to explain to end users what it is for, or when to use it.
> It was also agreed that we need to decide on a plan of "this is what
> playground is for" and then work to setup/cleanup/document things.
> 
> There seemed to be two main opinions of what to set the plan to.
> 
> A) epel8-playground is meant for package development and testing for
> major changes.  We stop doing the "build on both epel8 and
> epel8-playground", and epel8-playground packages only get built from
> the epel8-playground dist-git branch.

Thats my preferred setup. Note that this will take some releng work to
make it inherit right from epel8 and such. 

> B) epel8-playground is meant for future RHEL/CentOS testing, and thus
> everything built in epel8-playground get's built off CentOS Stream.
> We would continue the "build on both epel8 and epel8-playground" and
> this would make sure packages would be able to build on the newer
> RHEL.

I find this less compelling because stream changes are supposed to be
minor release changes, so typically not abi/api breaks or big version
updates. In general epel8 stable packages should keep working fine when
the next minor 8.x release comes out, so I don't know that this would be
particualrly valuable. 

> Both of these plans would require epel8-playground cleanup, and
> re-implementation.  Both would require work.  But the work would be
> quite different with the different plans.  So until we decide which
> way to go, we don't know what to do.
> 
> Thoughts on which plan to choose?  Or if there is something different?

A for me, not sure when I would have time to work on it, but I think
thats best. 

kevin 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@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