We are pleased to announce that Red Hat is establishing a small team directly responsible for participating in EPEL activities. Their job isn't to displace the EPEL community, but rather to support it full-time. We expect many beneficial effects, among those better EPEL readiness for a RHEL major release. The EPEL team will be part of the wider Community Platform Engineering group, or CPE for short.
As a reminder, CPE is the Red Hat team combining IT and release engineering from Fedora and CentOS.
Right now we are staffing up the team and expect to see us begin this work from October 2021. Keep an eye on the EPEL mailing list[1] and the associated tracker as we begin this exciting journey with the EPEL community.
[1] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject...
We are pleased to announce that Red Hat is establishing a small team directly responsible for participating in EPEL activities. Their job isn't to displace the EPEL community, but rather to support it full-time. We expect many beneficial effects, among those better EPEL readiness for a RHEL major release. The EPEL team will be part of the wider Community Platform Engineering group, or CPE for short.
As a reminder, CPE is the Red Hat team combining IT and release engineering from Fedora and CentOS.
Right now we are staffing up the team and expect to see us begin this work from October 2021. Keep an eye on the EPEL mailing list[1] and the associated tracker as we begin this exciting journey with the EPEL community.
[1] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject...
Thank you Red Hat, that's really GOOD news!
Regards, Simon
On 02/09/2021 14:15, Rich Bowen wrote:
We are pleased to announce that Red Hat is establishing a small team directly responsible for participating in EPEL activities. Their job isn't to displace the EPEL community, but rather to support it full-time. We expect many beneficial effects, among those better EPEL readiness for a RHEL major release. The EPEL team will be part of the wider Community Platform Engineering group, or CPE for short.
As a reminder, CPE is the Red Hat team combining IT and release engineering from Fedora and CentOS.
Right now we are staffing up the team and expect to see us begin this work from October 2021. Keep an eye on the EPEL mailing list[1] and the associated tracker as we begin this exciting journey with the EPEL community.
[1] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject...
[2] https://pagure.io/epel/issues
And how is EPEL for c9stream coming? many thanks, L.
We're getting close to launching epel9-next (built against CentOS Stream 9), just currently blocked by a Fedora s390x infrastructure issue before we can finalize it and announce it.
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject...
epel9 (built against RHEL9) won't exist until after the RHEL9 GA release.
On Sat, Nov 13, 2021 at 12:51 PM lejeczek via CentOS-devel centos-devel@centos.org wrote:
On 02/09/2021 14:15, Rich Bowen wrote:
We are pleased to announce that Red Hat is establishing a small team directly responsible for participating in EPEL activities. Their job isn't to displace the EPEL community, but rather to support it full-time. We expect many beneficial effects, among those better EPEL readiness for a RHEL major release. The EPEL team will be part of the wider Community Platform Engineering group, or CPE for short.
As a reminder, CPE is the Red Hat team combining IT and release engineering from Fedora and CentOS.
Right now we are staffing up the team and expect to see us begin this work from October 2021. Keep an eye on the EPEL mailing list[1] and the associated tracker as we begin this exciting journey with the EPEL community.
[1] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject...
[2] https://pagure.io/epel/issues
And how is EPEL for c9stream coming? many thanks, L. _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
Nice! Thanks to the EPEL developers for this must-have repo.
On Sat, 2021-11-13 at 17:00 -0600, Carl George wrote:
We're getting close to launching epel9-next (built against CentOS Stream 9), just currently blocked by a Fedora s390x infrastructure issue before we can finalize it and announce it.
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject...
epel9 (built against RHEL9) won't exist until after the RHEL9 GA release.
On Sat, Nov 13, 2021 at 12:51 PM lejeczek via CentOS-devel centos-devel@centos.org wrote:
On 02/09/2021 14:15, Rich Bowen wrote:
We are pleased to announce that Red Hat is establishing a small team directly responsible for participating in EPEL activities. Their job isn't to displace the EPEL community, but rather to support it full-time. We expect many beneficial effects, among those better EPEL readiness for a RHEL major release. The EPEL team will be part of the wider Community Platform Engineering group, or CPE for short.
As a reminder, CPE is the Red Hat team combining IT and release engineering from Fedora and CentOS.
Right now we are staffing up the team and expect to see us begin this work from October 2021. Keep an eye on the EPEL mailing list[1] and the associated tracker as we begin this exciting journey with the EPEL community.
[1] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject...
[2] https://pagure.io/epel/issues
And how is EPEL for c9stream coming? many thanks, L. _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On 13/11/2021 23:00, Carl George wrote:
We're getting close to launching epel9-next (built against CentOS Stream 9), just currently blocked by a Fedora s390x infrastructure issue before we can finalize it and announce it.
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject...
epel9 (built against RHEL9) won't exist until after the RHEL9 GA release.
On Sat, Nov 13, 2021 at 12:51 PM lejeczek via CentOS-devel
and a month later... It's taking somewhat long.
I'll ask a question not just I must be thinking - obvious rather - is that wise to let one arch be a such a blocker for the whole lot?
many thanks, L.
On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 at 11:45, lejeczek via CentOS-devel centos-devel@centos.org wrote:
On 13/11/2021 23:00, Carl George wrote:
We're getting close to launching epel9-next (built against CentOS Stream 9), just currently blocked by a Fedora s390x infrastructure issue before we can finalize it and announce it.
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject...
epel9 (built against RHEL9) won't exist until after the RHEL9 GA release.
On Sat, Nov 13, 2021 at 12:51 PM lejeczek via CentOS-devel
and a month later... It's taking somewhat long.
I'll ask a question not just I must be thinking - obvious rather - is that wise to let one arch be a such a blocker for the whole lot?
It isn't blocking anylonger. You seem to have missed the various emails about EPEL-9 being built for the last several weeks.
https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/9/ https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/testing/9/ https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/next/9/ https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/testing/next/9/
many thanks, L. _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On 12/13/21 12:00, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 at 11:45, lejeczek via CentOS-devel centos-devel@centos.org wrote:
On 13/11/2021 23:00, Carl George wrote:
We're getting close to launching epel9-next (built against CentOS Stream 9), just currently blocked by a Fedora s390x infrastructure issue before we can finalize it and announce it.
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject...
epel9 (built against RHEL9) won't exist until after the RHEL9 GA release.
On Sat, Nov 13, 2021 at 12:51 PM lejeczek via CentOS-devel
and a month later... It's taking somewhat long.
I'll ask a question not just I must be thinking - obvious rather - is that wise to let one arch be a such a blocker for the whole lot?
It isn't blocking anylonger. You seem to have missed the various emails about EPEL-9 being built for the last several weeks.
https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/9/ https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/testing/9/ https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/next/9/ https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/testing/next/9/
Also https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/epel-9-is-now-available/ on December 3rd.
On 13/12/2021 21:21, Rich Bowen wrote:
On 12/13/21 12:00, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 at 11:45, lejeczek via CentOS-devel centos-devel@centos.org wrote:
On 13/11/2021 23:00, Carl George wrote:
We're getting close to launching epel9-next (built against CentOS Stream 9), just currently blocked by a Fedora s390x infrastructure issue before we can finalize it and announce it.
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject...
epel9 (built against RHEL9) won't exist until after the RHEL9 GA release.
On Sat, Nov 13, 2021 at 12:51 PM lejeczek via CentOS-devel
and a month later... It's taking somewhat long.
I'll ask a question not just I must be thinking - obvious rather - is that wise to let one arch be a such a blocker for the whole lot?
It isn't blocking anylonger. You seem to have missed the various emails about EPEL-9 being built for the last several weeks.
https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/9/ https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/testing/9/ https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/next/9/ https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/testing/next/9/
Also https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/epel-9-is-now-available/ on December 3rd.
If it is all functional and ready for consumption - why not include its package in default(s) repo (as it's been with all previous CentOSes) instead of adding more instructions & howtos. Then 'dnf repoinfo' should give out enough info for admin to know what is what.
thanks, L
On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 02:59:30PM +0000, lejeczek via CentOS-devel wrote:
On 13/12/2021 21:21, Rich Bowen wrote:
On 12/13/21 12:00, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 at 11:45, lejeczek via CentOS-devel centos-devel@centos.org wrote:
On Sat, Nov 13, 2021 at 12:51 PM lejeczek via CentOS-devel
and a month later... It's taking somewhat long.
I'll ask a question not just I must be thinking - obvious rather - is that wise to let one arch be a such a blocker for the whole lot?
It isn't blocking anylonger. You seem to have missed the various emails about EPEL-9 being built for the last several weeks.
https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/9/ https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/testing/9/ https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/next/9/ https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/testing/next/9/
Also https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/epel-9-is-now-available/ on December 3rd.
If it is all functional and ready for consumption - why not include its package in default(s) repo (as it's been with all previous CentOSes) instead of adding more instructions & howtos. Then 'dnf repoinfo' should give out enough info for admin to know what is what.
That's a good question. I'm guessing it's because CS9 is a proper upstream to RHEL9, whereas even CS8 is actually still a rebuild, so CS9 can't ship anything RHEL9 won't ship.
Note how for all RHELs you always have to use DNF with a URL to the epel-release RPM:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/#_el9
Best,
On Fri, Dec 17, 2021, at 13:44, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 02:59:30PM +0000, lejeczek via CentOS-devel wrote:
On 13/12/2021 21:21, Rich Bowen wrote:
On 12/13/21 12:00, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 at 11:45, lejeczek via CentOS-devel centos-devel@centos.org wrote:
On Sat, Nov 13, 2021 at 12:51 PM lejeczek via CentOS-devel
and a month later... It's taking somewhat long.
I'll ask a question not just I must be thinking - obvious rather - is that wise to let one arch be a such a blocker for the whole lot?
It isn't blocking anylonger. You seem to have missed the various emails about EPEL-9 being built for the last several weeks.
https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/9/ https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/testing/9/ https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/next/9/ https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/testing/next/9/
Also https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/epel-9-is-now-available/ on December 3rd.
If it is all functional and ready for consumption - why not include its package in default(s) repo (as it's been with all previous CentOSes) instead of adding more instructions & howtos. Then 'dnf repoinfo' should give out enough info for admin to know what is what.
That's a good question. I'm guessing it's because CS9 is a proper upstream to RHEL9, whereas even CS8 is actually still a rebuild, so CS9 can't ship anything RHEL9 won't ship.
Note how for all RHELs you always have to use DNF with a URL to the epel-release RPM:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/#_el9
Best,
-- Michel Alexandre Salim profile: https://keyoxide.org/michel@michel-slm.name
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
Attachments:
- signature.asc
For convenience, we've historically included epel-release in the Extras repository, and we'll do the same for CentOS Stream 9.
This means you can `dnf install epel-release` on CentOS Stream and then EPEL repo definitions will be added to /etc/yum.repos.d
--Brian
On 12/17/21 13:44, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 02:59:30PM +0000, lejeczek via CentOS-devel wrote:
On 13/12/2021 21:21, Rich Bowen wrote:
On 12/13/21 12:00, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 at 11:45, lejeczek via CentOS-devel centos-devel@centos.org wrote:
On Sat, Nov 13, 2021 at 12:51 PM lejeczek via CentOS-devel
and a month later... It's taking somewhat long.
I'll ask a question not just I must be thinking - obvious rather - is that wise to let one arch be a such a blocker for the whole lot?
It isn't blocking anylonger. You seem to have missed the various emails about EPEL-9 being built for the last several weeks.
https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/9/ https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/testing/9/ https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/next/9/ https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/testing/next/9/
Also https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/epel-9-is-now-available/ on December 3rd.
If it is all functional and ready for consumption - why not include its package in default(s) repo (as it's been with all previous CentOSes) instead of adding more instructions & howtos. Then 'dnf repoinfo' should give out enough info for admin to know what is what.
That's a good question. I'm guessing it's because CS9 is a proper upstream to RHEL9, whereas even CS8 is actually still a rebuild, so CS9 can't ship anything RHEL9 won't ship.
Note how for all RHELs you always have to use DNF with a URL to the epel-release RPM:
In general, this statement is true .. BUT .. specifically for SIG release files, those would be able to be included.
-
Brian Stinson -
Carl George -
Johnny Hughes -
lejeczek -
Michel Alexandre Salim -
Rich Bowen -
Simon Matter -
Stephen John Smoogen -
Steven Rosenberg