On 07/09/2014 03:14 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote: > On 07/09/2014 12:24 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote: >> On 07/09/2014 02:37 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote: >>> hi, >>> >>> We are going to need to find a way to address content in CentOS ( or >>> well, content in EPEL ) where there are packages in centos that didnt >>> come from rhel but are going to overlap with whats in EPEL. >>> >>> Technically, this is a centos.org issue since EPEL's mandate requires >>> them to not overlap with RHEL[1]. But with stuff going into >>> CentOS-Extras/ and more content coming onboard from SIG's - and even >>> from Core SIG - how are we going to address the overlap / flapping >>> potential with EPEL ? >>> >>> I am going to be pulling in cloud-init with a couple of deps, need to >>> have these in the centos.org repos to do cloud instance builds. >>> >>> - KB >>> >>> [1]: I am not sure if EPEL cant overlap with base RHEL or with variants >>> and layered products ? >>> >> The only real way to handle it is with excludes or priorities in the yum >> config files .. that, or some other thing like epochs or higher versions >> in the centos.org content to make it newer (assuming that is the goal). > I am hoping we can find a way to communicate this and sync with the epel > folks in a manner that it does not cause too much issues. priorities > will help i guess, but it will cause issues when people want to consume > one and not the other ( either way ), specially when its down to libs > > Can;t we go with a new/separate repo , default disabled, with different (higher) priority ?