On 15/03/17 16:58, Karanbir Singh wrote:
> On 15/03/17 09:28, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
>
>> So my understanding is that the problem relies on the fact that there
>> isn't even a policy around Extras repository now. So it's up to the
>> people allowed to build/sign/push to know what they'll add in Extras,
>> and only in the arches they care about.
>
> https://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/ has aRepositories
> definition for the Extras repos. on C7 it should include what is
> upstream in the Extras/ repos ( provided we are able to build it ), and
> other things that are needed sometimes to build content in base / updates.
>
> In addition to this, Extras should contain all centos-release-* files
> from the SIG's.
>
> The only other content that should make it into Extras should be content
> vetted by the core sig, considered fundamental to user experience or
> tooling for user experience. ie. a fairly high barrier to entry.
>
> Does that give us enough policy wording for Extras ? Do we have
> exceptions we need to work through ?
>
Sounds good. So with that definition in mind, how can we be sure that
Extras is then built/distributed in parallel for all arches, so that
then it can be safely enabled within CBS ?
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel