[CentOS-devel] Policy for Ad-Hoc Upstreams: Development Hosting

Tue Nov 4 03:04:39 UTC 2014
Joe Brockmeier <jzb at redhat.com>

On 10/27/2014 02:23 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
> On 24/10/14 16:07, Brian Stinson wrote:
> 
>>
>> What are some other examples of projects that would benefit from this
>> workflow? 
> 
> 
> test suites for specific stuff ( eg. t_xen that checks if a new xen
> stack + kernel can still provision and run xen vm's ), documentation and
> code that maps to centos related efforts ( like centpkg and its dep
> chain ); these are all examples of the sort of projects I would expect
> to see using git.c.o as their upstream dev git's.
> 
> Also, SIG's have shown interest in moving some upstream content into
> git.centos.org - eg. the most recent conversations in the Atomic SIG
> about having some of their devel repos be moved into git.centos.org -
> and potentially doing some automated CI / testing around it as well.

Hi all - I don't really have input into the "how" of this, but I do have
questions about the "when" - as in, do we have a target to coming to
consensus, someone driving this, and ensuring it wraps up in a timely
fashion.

(KB's comment is the last one I can find on the thread, and that was a
week ago - so I'm concerned this has stalled without coming to resolution.)

Thanks,

jzb
-- 
Joe Brockmeier | Principal Cloud & Storage Analyst
jzb at redhat.com | http://community.redhat.com/
Twitter: @jzb  | http://dissociatedpress.net/

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20141103/3caffeaa/attachment-0007.sig>