On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 03:19:01PM -0500, Justin Forbes wrote: > On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 2:42 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 12:02:40PM -0400, Robbie Harwood wrote: > > > Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > It is under discussion whether this snapshot will have its own > > > > installation media. For now the preferred way to test ELN composes > > > > would be to use standard Fedora Rawhide images and then include ELN as > > > > an additional repository. > > > > > > Is there a dnf change that goes with this to prefer ELN content, then? > > > > Yeah, that's something I was trying to figure out too. As discussed > > before, for rpm '.eln < .fc33', so if the same package is available > > from both sources, the rawhide one will win. > > > > Can this be handled with the existing 'priority' directive in > repository config files? I think this is a nice behavior and we should consider not messing with it any. (ie, rawhide is always newer). Since we are not advertising this / marketing / expecting that normal users would use it, why not make it easy for them to go back if they install some eln packages? If you are one of the developers/testers you can use distro-sync, or a composed eln media to test and then just 'dnf update' (or distro-sync) back to rawhide. This also means if someone installs a .eln package on a stable fedora, it will be 'upgraded' away to next time the package updates. Or if they go from say f31 to f32. kevin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to 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/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
