On ti, 10 huhti 2018, Todd Zullinger wrote:
James Hogarth wrote:
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, 00:59 Todd Zullinger, <tmz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Red Hat announced today that Ansible was being deprecated
from the extras channel. Their advice is that those who
have "previously installed Ansible and its dependencies from
the Extras channel are advised to enable and update from the
Ansible Engine channel, or uninstall the packages as future
errata will not be provided from the Extras channel."
https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:1075
Given that, I believe it is reasonable to see ansible return
to EPEL. This was discussed in previous EPEL meetings a
bit, so I'm sure it was known to at least some of the folks
involved.
Cheers for the info.
It wasn't mentioned on the devel list, I didn't see it in the 7.5 release
notes and it was still in extras when I checked a short while ago.
In that case yes I agree it makes total sense to return to epel7
I wonder why they dropped it when the whole point of them bringing it in to
begin with was for Satellite and Tower to have it in the standard RHEL
repos.
Seems so pointless to have only had one release there!
Indeed, it was a bit strange. Perhaps someone with more
insight into the rationale can comment. I have no
particular knowledge of things, but maybe keeping a fast
moving project like ansible in even the RHEL extras channel
was a problem.
Maybe the plan with the move to the "Ansible Engine" channel
is to work closer with subscribers on migrating from version
to version. And non-subscribers can just follow it in EPEL.
I'd be interested in hearing more about the change, though I
suspect those who know more either aren't on these lists or
can't say more than Red Hat's advisory has already.
I'm not in Ansible engineering or product management so take this with a
grain of salt. My understanding is that cadence of Ansible releases and
its aggressiveness in API changes makes it a bit less suitable to follow
a traditional RHEL 7 release cadence. A separate product channel allows
them to update packages at own cadence.
I wonder how re-packaging for CentOS targets could happen with this
approach and probably moving it back to EPEL7 is indeed something that
makes more sense.
--
/ Alexander Bokovoy
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
