In the discussions for putting CentOS 7 together, the board's agreed to make the epel-release package available in the centos-extras repository as part of the el7 build.
What this means:
The EPEL repository will NOT be enabled by default, but it will be available. Following an install, an admin would be able to 'yum install epel-release'. Following the success of that command, they could then use epel normally.
In order to accomplish this without having yum complain, we will re-sign the epel-release package with the centos key. The EPEL gpg keys will remain intact in the file included, so yum will prompt and import normally on the first package installed via EPEL.
Are there any objections to this before we execute?
On 06/26/2014 10:28 AM, Jim Perrin wrote:
In the discussions for putting CentOS 7 together, the board's agreed to make the epel-release package available in the centos-extras repository as part of the el7 build.
Are there any objections to this before we execute?
My main concern would be that it would give an implicit approval of all EPEL packages for CentOS 7. That also implies that we would support EPEL packages in the IRC channel and other forums even though CentOS has no control over those packages at all.
On the flip side it also means that to be fair CentOS should include the -release packages for other third-party repositories as well.
Peter
On 06/25/2014 06:30 PM, Peter wrote:
On 06/26/2014 10:28 AM, Jim Perrin wrote:
In the discussions for putting CentOS 7 together, the board's agreed to make the epel-release package available in the centos-extras repository as part of the el7 build.
Are there any objections to this before we execute?
My main concern would be that it would give an implicit approval of all EPEL packages for CentOS 7. That also implies that we would support EPEL packages in the IRC channel and other forums even though CentOS has no control over those packages at all.
On the flip side it also means that to be fair CentOS should include the -release packages for other third-party repositories as well.
We would come up with a process for other repos, yes. But we have to start somewhere and EPEL is the one the board thinks we should start with.
WRT the IRC support, we can redirect people to #epel if it is related specifically to packaging, etc .. and we can support other things (assuming someone knows the info) in #centos. We should likely support more things in #centos anyway :)
On 06/26/2014 02:28 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 06/25/2014 06:30 PM, Peter wrote:
On 06/26/2014 10:28 AM, Jim Perrin wrote:
In the discussions for putting CentOS 7 together, the board's agreed to make the epel-release package available in the centos-extras repository as part of the el7 build.
Are there any objections to this before we execute?
My main concern would be that it would give an implicit approval of all EPEL packages for CentOS 7. That also implies that we would support EPEL packages in the IRC channel and other forums even though CentOS has no control over those packages at all.
On the flip side it also means that to be fair CentOS should include the -release packages for other third-party repositories as well.
We would come up with a process for other repos, yes. But we have to start somewhere and EPEL is the one the board thinks we should start with.
WRT the IRC support, we can redirect people to #epel if it is related specifically to packaging, etc .. and we can support other things (assuming someone knows the info) in #centos. We should likely support more things in #centos anyway :)
When Board discusses other repositories, please keep in mind addition of priority=x (and maybe yum-plugin-priorities), and maybe some tool to easily change priorities (for those wanting non-vanila priorities). Changing default priority (without priority line) to 20 or some other number would make sure repos without priority line would not mess with configured ones.
EPEL and other 3rd party repositories with lesser priority then base/updates + plugin would be very safe.
My main concern would be that it would give an implicit approval of all EPEL packages for CentOS 7. That also implies that we would support EPEL packages in the IRC channel and other forums even though CentOS has no control over those packages at all.
Remember that by installing the ‘release’ package from any repository, you implicitly agree to the terms they provide in their license. I don’t think we’ll have to support EPEL as a result (just support for the release package itself)
Dan
On 26 June 2014 21:53, Ljubomir Ljubojevic centos@plnet.rs wrote:
On 06/26/2014 02:28 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 06/25/2014 06:30 PM, Peter wrote:
On 06/26/2014 10:28 AM, Jim Perrin wrote:
In the discussions for putting CentOS 7 together, the board's agreed to make the epel-release package available in the centos-extras repository as part of the el7 build.
Are there any objections to this before we execute?
My main concern would be that it would give an implicit approval of all EPEL packages for CentOS 7. That also implies that we would support EPEL packages in the IRC channel and other forums even though CentOS has no control over those packages at all.
On the flip side it also means that to be fair CentOS should include the -release packages for other third-party repositories as well.
We would come up with a process for other repos, yes. But we have to start somewhere and EPEL is the one the board thinks we should start
with.
WRT the IRC support, we can redirect people to #epel if it is related specifically to packaging, etc .. and we can support other things (assuming someone knows the info) in #centos. We should likely support more things in #centos anyway :)
When Board discusses other repositories, please keep in mind addition of priority=x (and maybe yum-plugin-priorities), and maybe some tool to easily change priorities (for those wanting non-vanila priorities). Changing default priority (without priority line) to 20 or some other number would make sure repos without priority line would not mess with configured ones.
EPEL and other 3rd party repositories with lesser priority then base/updates + plugin would be very safe.
-- Ljubomir Ljubojevic (Love is in the Air) PL Computers Serbia, Europe
StarOS, Mikrotik and CentOS/RHEL/Linux consultant _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On 06/27/2014 04:35 PM, Dan Porter wrote:
My main concern would be that it would give an implicit approval of all EPEL packages for CentOS 7. That also implies that we would support EPEL packages in the IRC channel and other forums even though CentOS has no control over those packages at all.Remember that by installing the ‘release’ package from any repository, you implicitly agree to the terms they provide in their license. I don’t think we’ll have to support EPEL as a result (just support for the release package itself)
Dan
On 26 June 2014 21:53, Ljubomir Ljubojevic <centos@plnet.rs mailto:centos@plnet.rs> wrote:
On 06/26/2014 02:28 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 06/25/2014 06:30 PM, Peter wrote: >> On 06/26/2014 10:28 AM, Jim Perrin wrote: >>> In the discussions for putting CentOS 7 together, the board's agreed to >>> make the epel-release package available in the centos-extras repository >>> as part of the el7 build. >>> >>> Are there any objections to this before we execute? >> My main concern would be that it would give an implicit approval of all >> EPEL packages for CentOS 7. That also implies that we would support >> EPEL packages in the IRC channel and other forums even though CentOS has >> no control over those packages at all. >> >> On the flip side it also means that to be fair CentOS should include the >> -release packages for other third-party repositories as well. > > We would come up with a process for other repos, yes. But we have to > start somewhere and EPEL is the one the board thinks we should start with. > > WRT the IRC support, we can redirect people to #epel if it is related > specifically to packaging, etc .. and we can support other things > (assuming someone knows the info) in #centos. We should likely support > more things in #centos anyway :) > When Board discusses other repositories, please keep in mind addition of priority=x (and maybe yum-plugin-priorities), and maybe some tool to easily change priorities (for those wanting non-vanila priorities). Changing default priority (without priority line) to 20 or some other number would make sure repos without priority line would not mess with configured ones. EPEL and other 3rd party repositories with lesser priority then base/updates + plugin would be very safe.
If centos-release gets priority=1 line for base/updates repositories, and included yum-plugin-priorities is modified to include default priority value = 20 (when there is no priority= line), then ANY repo (including EPEL) will have default 20 and will not be able to override any repository that centos is releasing (with priority=1 line).
On 06/27/2014 09:35 AM, Dan Porter wrote:
My main concern would be that it would give an implicit approval of all EPEL packages for CentOS 7. That also implies that we would support EPEL packages in the IRC channel and other forums even though CentOS has no control over those packages at all.
Remember that by installing the ‘release’ package from any repository, you implicitly agree to the terms they provide in their license. I don’t think we’ll have to support EPEL as a result (just support for the release package itself)
Most of the irc regulars already recommend EPEL as the first place to go for things not in the distro, so there's already some level of implicit approval. You are correct in that we only need to support the release package itself. Anything beyond that is up to the whims of whoever is helping on irc. If they choose to assist, I don't see a problem. If they choose to punt over the fence into #epel, that works too.
On 06/27/2014 04:48 PM, Jim Perrin wrote:
On 06/27/2014 09:35 AM, Dan Porter wrote:
My main concern would be that it would give an implicit approval of all EPEL packages for CentOS 7. That also implies that we would support EPEL packages in the IRC channel and other forums even though CentOS has no control over those packages at all.
Remember that by installing the ‘release’ package from any repository, you implicitly agree to the terms they provide in their license. I don’t think we’ll have to support EPEL as a result (just support for the release package itself)
Most of the irc regulars already recommend EPEL as the first place to go for things not in the distro, so there's already some level of implicit approval. You are correct in that we only need to support the release package itself. Anything beyond that is up to the whims of whoever is helping on irc. If they choose to assist, I don't see a problem. If they choose to punt over the fence into #epel, that works too.
its also worth noting that epel does not overwrite stuff in the distro. And we might need to / want to setup some sort of a nightly test in ci.dev.centos.org to verify this and email / alert the right people.
- KB
On 27/06/14 16:51, Karanbir Singh wrote:
its also worth noting that epel does not overwrite stuff in the distro. And we might need to / want to setup some sort of a nightly test in ci.dev.centos.org to verify this and email / alert the right people.
In theory this is true, however on el6 we have
90 packages excluded due to repository priority protections
and on el7 at present
38 packages excluded due to repository priority protections
T
On Jun 25, 2014 3:28 PM, "Jim Perrin" jperrin@centos.org wrote:
In the discussions for putting CentOS 7 together, the board's agreed to make the epel-release package available in the centos-extras repository as part of the el7 build.
What this means:
The EPEL repository will NOT be enabled by default, but it will be available. Following an install, an admin would be able to 'yum install epel-release'. Following the success of that command, they could then use epel normally.
In order to accomplish this without having yum complain, we will re-sign the epel-release package with the centos key. The EPEL gpg keys will remain intact in the file included, so yum will prompt and import normally on the first package installed via EPEL.
Are there any objections to this before we execute?
This sounds good to me.
-Jeff
Hi,
Great news. Installing epel-release is the first thing I do after a minimal install. :-)
Does this apply to v6, too?
Lucian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Perrin" jperrin@centos.org To: "The CentOS developers mailing list." centos-devel@centos.org Sent: Wednesday, 25 June, 2014 11:28:16 PM Subject: [CentOS-devel] Adding the EPEL release package to the extras repository
In the discussions for putting CentOS 7 together, the board's agreed to make the epel-release package available in the centos-extras repository as part of the el7 build.
What this means:
The EPEL repository will NOT be enabled by default, but it will be available. Following an install, an admin would be able to 'yum install epel-release'. Following the success of that command, they could then use epel normally.
In order to accomplish this without having yum complain, we will re-sign the epel-release package with the centos key. The EPEL gpg keys will remain intact in the file included, so yum will prompt and import normally on the first package installed via EPEL.
Are there any objections to this before we execute?
-- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77 _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On 26/06/14 09:34, Nux! wrote:
Hi,
Great news. Installing epel-release is the first thing I do after a minimal install. :-)
Does this apply to v6, too?
Lucian
Well, the initial target is 7, but obviously there is no reason to not include it elsewhere too (so 6 and even 5)
Cheers,
Am 26.06.2014 00:28, schrieb Jim Perrin:
In the discussions for putting CentOS 7 together, the board's agreed to make the epel-release package available in the centos-extras repository as part of the el7 build.
What this means:
The EPEL repository will NOT be enabled by default, but it will be available. Following an install, an admin would be able to 'yum install epel-release'. Following the success of that command, they could then use epel normally.
In order to accomplish this without having yum complain, we will re-sign the epel-release package with the centos key. The EPEL gpg keys will remain intact in the file included, so yum will prompt and import normally on the first package installed via EPEL.
Are there any objections to this before we execute?
+1 from my side
-
Christoph Galuschka -
Dan Porter -
Fabian Arrotin -
Jeff Sheltren -
Jim Perrin -
Johnny Hughes -
Karanbir Singh -
Ljubomir Ljubojevic -
Michael Stahnke -
Nux! -
Peter -
Trevor Hemsley