Re: [CentOS] [DRBD-user] Kernel independent DRBD packages for RHEL, CentOS and Scientific Linux
This seems like duplication of effort with the CentOS people, since they already package DRBD for CentOS 5.x (and it works very well).
No its not, the CentOS packages are no longer maintained...
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Joseph L. Casale jcasale@activenetwerx.com wrote:
This seems like duplication of effort with the CentOS people, since they already package DRBD for CentOS 5.x (and it works very well).
No its not, the CentOS packages are no longer maintained...
http://dev.centos.org/testing/ tells me something else (and yes, this time they will go into extras).
Ralph
On Mon, 21 Jun 2010, Ralph Angenendt wrote:
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Joseph L. Casale jcasale@activenetwerx.com wrote:
This seems like duplication of effort with the CentOS people, since they already package DRBD for CentOS 5.x (and it works very well).
No its not, the CentOS packages are no longer maintained...
http://dev.centos.org/testing/ tells me something else (and yes, this time they will go into extras).
Well, it was confusing. When we decided to spend the effort to add kmod-drbd to ELRepo there were a few reasons:
- The lack of updates in the CentOS repository, while a new update is now in testing, a few have been skipped/delayed in the past.
- The infrastructure, team and workflow of the ELRepo project all focuses specifically on kernel modules.
- The opinion at FOSDEM of team-members that CentOS was going to go back to its core-business, and drop additional RPM packages like in CentOS Extras.
So my personal opinion (and I had to convince other team-members) was that we should do this despite the fact that it is a duplication of effort and only if we can provide the same quality as we do with other packages. (Which is exactly why we asked for feedback on this mailinglist !)
We didn't do this out of the blue either, this was also discussed on the centos-devel mailinglist (although with less feedback than I had hoped).
Now, it shouldn't really matter to users whether this is a duplication of effort or not. Users will now have additional choice, if CentOS delays or skips a release, ELRepo might have it available. Everybody wins.
Once again, I didn't want any controversy, we are just looking for CentOS people that are willing to test and provide feedback regarding the ELRepo kmod-drbd packages (preferably on the ELRepo bug-tracker / mailinglist to not cause even more controversy).
Kind regards,
On 6/21/2010 11:21 AM, Dag Wieers wrote:
Now, it shouldn't really matter to users whether this is a duplication of effort or not. Users will now have additional choice, if CentOS delays or skips a release, ELRepo might have it available. Everybody wins.
On the other hand, it is likely to cause someone pain whenever same-named packages or conflicting file content exists in multiple uncoordinated repositories.
Am 21.06.10 18:21, schrieb Dag Wieers:
Once again, I didn't want any controversy, we are just looking for CentOS people that are willing to test and provide feedback regarding the ELRepo kmod-drbd packages (preferably on the ELRepo bug-tracker / mailinglist to not cause even more controversy).
I'm not seeing this as a controversy, and I'd probably be happy normally if someone else took care of those modules, but as we started offering those modules in extras, we need to offer those as to not interrupt "user experience". I just wanted to say that I still care about those modules, but the "publishing experience" hasn't been that great for the last ones. And yes, that is my fault to a rather large degree.
:)
Cheers,
Ralph
http://dev.centos.org/testing/ tells me something else (and yes, this time they will go into extras).
Well, we talked about it for some time and I never saw an update to the effort someone made (my bad? I must have missed that). Couple this with the concerns posted by Dag that motivated him to step in, are we to assume this effort is here to stay or on the chopping block as per new direction spoke about in Dags email?
jlc
Am 21.06.10 20:45, schrieb Joseph L. Casale:
http://dev.centos.org/testing/ tells me something else (and yes, this time they will go into extras).
Well, we talked about it for some time and I never saw an update to the effort someone made (my bad? I must have missed that). Couple this with the concerns posted by Dag that motivated him to step in, are we to assume this effort is here to stay or on the chopping block as per new direction spoke about in Dags email?
I will keep the 8.3.x line updated in extras, as I cannot expect users to switch repos for packages we began offering. And yes, I was a bit sloppy with getting those packages into extras.
Regards,
Ralph
On 6/21/2010 2:35 PM, Ralph Angenendt wrote:
Am 21.06.10 20:45, schrieb Joseph L. Casale:
http://dev.centos.org/testing/ tells me something else (and yes, this time they will go into extras).
Well, we talked about it for some time and I never saw an update to the effort someone made (my bad? I must have missed that). Couple this with the concerns posted by Dag that motivated him to step in, are we to assume this effort is here to stay or on the chopping block as per new direction spoke about in Dags email?
I will keep the 8.3.x line updated in extras, as I cannot expect users to switch repos for packages we began offering. And yes, I was a bit sloppy with getting those packages into extras.
Wouldn't it be even better to offer identical packages with coordinated updates so as to not have conflicts for people that might have both repos enabled? Or is there some difference in functionality? I think I've noticed a few things that were installed from extras update from epel already
On Mon, 2010-06-21 at 17:11 +0200, Ralph Angenendt wrote:
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Joseph L. Casale jcasale@activenetwerx.com wrote:
This seems like duplication of effort with the CentOS people, since they already package DRBD for CentOS 5.x (and it works very well).
No its not, the CentOS packages are no longer maintained...
http://dev.centos.org/testing/ tells me something else (and yes, this time they will go into extras).
Ralph
--- The requested URL /testing/ was not found on this server. I give up...
John
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 9:03 AM, JohnS jses27@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, 2010-06-21 at 17:11 +0200, Ralph Angenendt wrote:
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Joseph L. Casale jcasale@activenetwerx.com wrote:
This seems like duplication of effort with the CentOS people, since they already package DRBD for CentOS 5.x (and it works very well).
No its not, the CentOS packages are no longer maintained...
http://dev.centos.org/testing/ tells me something else (and yes, this time they will go into extras).
Ralph
The requested URL /testing/ was not found on this server. I give up...
a few clicks around and I found this:
http://dev.centos.org/centos/5/testing/
Is that the place?
HTH, -Bob
-
Bob Beers -
Dag Wieers -
JohnS -
Joseph L. Casale -
Les Mikesell -
Ralph Angenendt