On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 5:12 PM Richard Shaw <hobbes1069@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Why isn't this fixed in the package? Because the community never achieved a consensus as to what to do, as there were no proposals that did not include notable objections (and some of the required fixes to tooling for some of the approaches were still, I believe, a work in progress (although soon)). > Though I do remember the thread Gary referenced, still I would think it would be a good idea to choose ANY of them if for no other reason than to not leave things broken. As noted in the announcement for the next new mock release (and core configs) everything is different all over again.... We shall see if this newer update will reach stable, or other issues are identified that will need to be addressed. Discussed here: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/thread/BNQ2TFWODJW3JSOBAG26AZQBOS5HHZMD/ along with the related ticket RHBZ #2026571 It appears the upstream has a few additional configurations for centos-stream+epel that I would like to see get in sooner rather than later just to address some taxonomy consistency, but they are not really critical. As an aside, I will also note that the rpmfusion mock configs will probably need to adjust to the new names once the mock core config changes get to stable. That may result in some new mock opportunities for you going forward. _______________________________________________ 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
