[CentOS-devel] RH patches v/s vanilla docker in CentOS

[Colin Walters]

On Mon, Apr 20, 2015, at 03:43 PM, Jim Perrin wrote:

> Agree. It would be nice to hear what the Atomic SIG folks think about
> this though as they're direct consumers.

This sounds obvious but it's worth restating - the best end result is for
patches to be upstream as much as possible.  Some of the patches
*do* affect behavior in an important way, and finding a path
forward that keeps all parties happy enough is the critical
problem to solve.

Something RPM could be better at is notifying you when
a package has patches, particularly nontrivial ones.  This is
something that really should be expressible in the metadata.

# rpm -q docker
docker-1.6.0-3.x86_64 (6 patches)

or something.  Anyways...in the short term I guess I'm ok with
the CentOS Atomic Spin being vanilla but, let's keep the situation
fluid here as (I just saw Dan follow up) some of the patches
are really useful.