On 06/17/2014 11:13 AM, Jeff Sheltren wrote: > On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 9:06 AM, Karanbir Singh <mail-lists at karan.org> > wrote: > >> hi, >> >> So we now have RHEL media, RHEL optionals and RHEL Extras. Optionals and >> media seems to tie in as before, however Extras has its own policy + >> lifeterm etc. >> >> Thoughts on what we might do with those rpms ? I'd have though that >> putting them in CentOS-Extras would line up nicely. Content that is >> available out of the blocks to anyone with a CentOS install, but not >> themselves included in the distro. >> >> thoughts ? >> >> > I like that approach. If these packages actually have different lifetime > expectancies, may change versions, etc. I think putting them in Base could > be problematic. CentOS-Extras seems like a good compromise. Is there any > reason these might need to be separated from what was historically in > CentOS-Extras? +1 to CentOS-Extras here as well. -- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77