<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Brian Stinson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:bstinson@ksu.edu" target="_blank">bstinson@ksu.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi All,<br>
<br>
I would like to start a discussion on where/how to ship the package<br>
building toolchain. Most of these tools shipped in EPEL, but deploying<br>
them to one of our repos would allow us to maintain our own patches if<br>
necessary and would eliminate any dependencies on 3rd party repositories<br>
for our core tools.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I'd much rather not do this for a couple reasons:</div><div>1. CentOS Extras shouldn't overlap with EPEL.</div><div>2. If there are reasons to customize/patch some of these things for the CentOS infrastructure, perhaps they belong in a new/separate repo -- especially considering centos-extras is enabled by default.</div><div><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
1.) Some of the tools (koji especially) will require config<br>
customization, what is the best way to handle that?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Isn't there some configuration management system in place? Or maybe I'm misunderstanding the question...?</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
2.) What should the testing -> release process look like after a koji<br>
build is done?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Are you planning to have a testing/staging Koji instance running for people to QA?</div><div></div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">-Jeff</div></div>