On Mon, May 26, 2025 at 3:08 PM Mark Kemel via automotive-sig < automotive-sig@lists.centos.org> wrote:

Hello all,

Currently we have two packages, for which we have dedicated COPR repos for release versions: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/g/centos-automotive-sig/automotive-i... https://www.google.com/url?q=https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/g/centos-automotive-sig/automotive-image-builder/&source=gmail&sa=D&sa=E and https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/g/centos-automotive-sig/osbuild-auto... https://www.google.com/url?q=https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/g/centos-automotive-sig/osbuild-auto/&source=gmail&sa=D&sa=E. These are automatically built with Packit, triggered by GitLab releases, allowing users to run a-i-b on Fedora.

Following the Slack discussion on auto-boot-check COPR builds, I want to address this here. For packages like auto-boot-check, which are built solely for the AutoSD/Automotive SIG and not intended for Fedora release but should be installable from COPR, we need to decide on the repository structure. Should we create a separate COPR repo for each package under the '@centos-automotive-sig' project, similar to a-i-b and osbuild-auto, or should we group these packages into repos by usage? For instance, should auto-boot-check release builds be done within the automotive-image-builder repo?

I think it would be beneficial to have an official repository for Fedora, which will contain releases of the same packages as we have in AutoSD.

Looking forward to your thoughts on this.

Best regards,

Mark

Mark Kemel

Senior Software Engineer, RHIVOS

Red Hat https://www.redhat.com

mkemel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com

---

automotive-sig mailing list -- automotive-sig@lists.centos.org To unsubscribe send an email to automotive-sig-leave@lists.centos.org