On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 2:10 PM Troy Dawson <tdawson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 11:12 AM kevin <kevin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 02:50:39PM -0300, Pablo Sebastián Greco wrote: > > > > > > On 21/8/20 19:06, Troy Dawson wrote: > > > > > > C) Drop playground. Say it was an interesting experiment and we > > > > learned stuff, but shut it down. > > > > (and clean up the package.cfg files as part of shutting it down) > > > > > > > > D) > > > > 1 - Manual builds only. No package.cfg files. No automatic builds. > > > > 2 - Assume playground depends on epel8. > > > > 3 - Use CentOS 8 Stream to build against. > > > > > > > > I am leaning towards option D. > > > > We've already got all the playground infrastructure setup. I don't > > > > want to waste that. So, although I said option C in the meeting, that > > > > doesn't mean I want it, I was just stating it was an option. > > > I like option D too, looks like a more polished version of option B > > > > Do we have any data here? > > > > Are stream changes breaking epel packages so that they need rebuilds > > often? > > > > It will mean that if someone wants to use playground to test some large > > change in epel, they will have to find people who also enable stream to > > test it most likely? > > > > Do we know that many/any people are consuming stream all the time? > > > > We also don't have much way to say 'if you enable epel8-playground you > > have to enable stream repos also'. > > > > I guess I don't think the yummy to trouble ratio is good enough here to > > justify the trouble of enabling stream. Can you expand on why this is > > good/what it gets us? > > > > Pros for building against stream: > - We would have a way to test EPEL packages that matter against the > not yet released RHEL version. > -- How often would this matter? > -- It's hard to say. There might not be a single EPEL package needing > this for the entire RHEL 8.3 release. > -- I know for the 8.2 release, I would have liked it so I would have > had a place to let others test my updated KDE. > --- But I found a work around, so I didn't have to have it. > > Cons for building against stream: > - I think you've hit on a big thing. For those wanting a major > change, but don't care about stream, then playground becomes useless. > -- So this cuts down on the usefulness of playground. Packagers who > want a major change in their package, and are working on stream. > - HERE IS THE BIGGEST CON AGAINST USING STREAM > -- CentOS Stream is only going to be based on RHEL8 until RHEL9 comes > out. At some point after that, it switches to being based off RHEL9. > --- This means that infrastructure is going to have to switch > everything back to being built off RHEL. > --- We will have to re-document things. > --- More confusion if we had go the CentOS Stream route. > > Troy At the EPEL Steering Committee Meeting, this was discussed again. I believe we all agree that having -playground build off Stream isn't a good thing. But we are also concerned about possible library changes in RHEL8 that might affect EPEL8 packages, and having something based off Stream would be good. Here is the proposal. Note: A) was re-written with better wording than above. A) epel8-playground 1 - Manual builds only. No package.cfg files. No automatic builds. 2 - Assume playground depends on epel8. 3 - Built off RHEL8 and CentOS Devel, just like epel8 is built. E) epel8-next 1 - Manual builds only. No package.cfg files. No automatic builds. 2 - Assume -next depends on epel. 3 - Built off CentOS Stream. 4 - Has a limited lifetime that corresponds with the CentOS Stream / RHEL lifetime. -- In other words, after CentOS Stream switches from RHEL8 to RHEL9, then epel8-next get's archived. If people are wondering about the name, it was decided to use -next instead of -stream, due to the overuse of 'stream' among other reasons. Thoughts? Troy _______________________________________________ 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
