On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 6:39 AM, George Dunlap <dunlapg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 9:11 PM, Lokesh Mandvekar > <lsm5@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Moving this discussion to centos-virt@ as it's upto the SIG to decide on >> how this moves ahead. >> >> I'm hoping to have 2 new koji tag sets: >> >> virt7-docker-fedora-* (will have fedora rpms rebuilt) >> virt7-docker-el-* (will have rhel candidate builds before they are released >> or land in centos extras) >> >> The -el-* repos will help to have Virt SIG as sort of an upstream and early QA >> for both RHEL and CentOS extras. >> >> If the SIG is ok with it, I'll check with CBS guys to create these 2 tags. >> >> See below message to centos-devel@ and >> http://centos-devel.1051824.n5.nabble.com/CentOS-devel-docker-and-docker-latest-packages-on-CentOS-Virt-SIG-td5712734.html >> for background > > I think having the RHEL version makes sense; but I'm not sure exactly > what we gain from having a version labelled "fedora". If someone > wanted the Fedora docker, why wouldn't they just install Fedora? And > if in this case "Fedora" really just stands for "Recently stable > docker", then we should probably just come up with another name for it > that describes it better (even if in the end it turns out to be a > straight re-building of the Fedora RPM). I pesonally do this kind of backporting, a *lot* with Perl and Python modules. They're often sadly out of date on a RHEL production grade system, but switching to a Fedora base for your production environments can get really flakey, really fast due to the immense churn of that operating system. _______________________________________________ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@xxxxxxxxxx https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
