On Sat, Jan 15, 2022 at 6:29 PM Orion Poplawski <orion@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > I don't buy any of these arguments, and it doesn't really address the > situation of "missing -devel" packages. The missing devel packages for shipped libraries are a clear pain point for those that just want build something for their EL system(s), and not go through something like mock to do it (or create/build/maintain their own <pkg>-epel package). This is not a new issue, though. A number of missing devel packages were identified with EL8, with the statement that the long term would be to open tickets requesting the devel packages be added to CRB. As I recall, some were, and some were not. I would have preferred the EL8 experience was taken to heart for EL9, and if it was felt necessary to ship the base library, the devel package would have been in CRB by default just to avoid a repeat of the pain point. To be fair, I have seen some devel packages for EL9 libraries (after a bugzilla ticket) being added to the stream 9 CRB repo, so the RH teams are being responsive, even as I am sure there are internal processes to work through. _______________________________________________ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
