On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Brian Stinson <bstinson at ksu.edu> wrote: > Hi All, > > In the CBS/Infra meeting on Monday we agreed to start a discussion here > on the mailing list about how to handle "ad-hoc" upstreams. An ad-hoc > upstream could best be described as a project we would like to ship that > is developed within the CentOS community (centpkg is one example). Is there some reason the work cannot or should not go into getting the packages into Fedora and EPEL? I realize there's a much more professional relationship with RHEL now that git.centos.org is the RHEL 7 publication repo, and that EPEL will not publish tools that overlap with RHEL upstream and thus overlap with CentOS, for a lot of very good reasons. > Developers of an ad-hoc upstream need some extra infra (e.g. a git repo > for doing active development) in addition to the dist-git repo on > git.centos.org where the package specs live. > > I would like to start the policy and procedure discussion with the > following proposals: > > - Host the ad-hoc development repositories on git.centos.org in separate > Gitblit projects > > - Host the ad-hoc development repositories on Github, linked to the > CentOS project group > > - Host the ad-hoc development repositories someplace else? > > Thanks! > Brian It takes some work if you're overlapping the core OS packages, work that I'm sure CentOS developers are familiar with. I personally publish toolsl for that for RT version 4 and Samba version 4 at https://github.com/nkadel/.