On 2 July 2018 at 13:54, Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 11:14 AM Matthias Runge mrunge@matthias-runge.de wrote:
On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 03:33:06PM +0100, Trevor Hemsley via CentOS-devel wrote:
On 02/07/18 13:36, Matthias Runge wrote:
Creation of a new SIG "Messaging"
Hereby, I'm asking for comments about founding a new SIG to handle messaging stacks in CentOS. We currently have in CentOS RabbitMQ handling AMQP 0.9, and QPID, which provides messaging using AMQP 1.0. There are also packages supporting Kafka, but not Kafka itself.
Collaborating SIGs would be the Cloud and the Opstools SIGs. Both would be consuming built packages produced by the Messaging SIG.
We also briefly took into consideration to incorporate the newly proposed SIG into one of the others. At the end, messaging is different than Cloud or Operational tools. It doesn't really fit. The best solution seemed to us to have another SIG.
If there are any questions or comments, please don't hesitate to reply to the list, and let's find the best proposal here.
Matthias
Both rabbitmq and qpid packages already exist in EPEL. RabbitMQ is on the latest 3.6.x version but that is dependent on the version of erlang that's available - and EPEL currently supplies R16B-03.18.el7. The 3.6 series is still current and supported AFAIK. Getting a more recent version would mean a rebase of erlang.
Don't know anything about qpid but the EPEL packages are currently 1.38.0-1.el7
So, EPEL is not acceptable in Opstools nor in Cloud. If you want to link against libraries, you'll need to have them available directly in the build system, not via external repositories.
The other thing I really like with the idea of having a SIG is its clear (and small) focus. With that, you don't need to worry that some other package gets overwritten.
It's quite easy to get a package into EPEL. We all know, it happens from time to time, that packages there get upgraded at times you don't really like, especially when that breaks your CI.
I don't want to sound too rude here, but have you tried actually being involved in the maintainership of those packages in EPEL that you need?
I believe Mathias has worked on various parts of EPEL and other repositories for a long time. His frustration with things changing out from underneath him in EPEL several times are quite valid. I don't think that there is going to be one answer to fixing this, but there may be methods that it can be done to make it less frustrating.
An explosion of SIGs also causes its own burdens, and things that are common to multiple SIGs probably should be in EPEL so that maintenance is shared and used by everyone.
-- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel