On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 2:01 PM Pavel Raiskup <praiskup@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > First I don't feel comfortable announcing this, I'm not happy about the > situation and so I don't want to be the lightning rod :-). I do not believe anyone should blame you for bringing this up (although, it should be noted, killing the messenger has never, really, gone out of style :-). > I am proposing (as PR against mock upstream ATM [1]) to switch the default > epel-* configuration from CentOS+EPEL to RHEL+EPEL as soon as possible > (see the pull request [1]). > Any thoughts? Feedback is needed here. I have a number of cases where I package software via mock that (for various reasons) is never really released into a formal public repo, but for which I would like to be able to just build the rpm for EL<x>. Having to obtain and manage (even a free) RH subscription will be a major PITA for such activities (especially as I suspect I will need a number of different subscriptions for the various different role "hats" that are worn). I have no great alternatives. However, as EL<x> typically has a binary compatibility promise across its lifecycle, is a viable alternative to have a (perhaps separate) mock config for building be the base release version? With the (typical) exception of the compiler(s) themselves, the feature and security updates are at run time, and not build time (and in my cases, the run time systems will be (mostly) fully updated so that would probably work out ok, for me). Anyway, thanks for bringing the issue up. _______________________________________________ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
