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

[Joe Brockmeier]

On 04/21/2015 12:05 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> Which is why I thought we want RH type behavior (ie patches) on both our
> fast moving and RHEL Atomic Host downstream branches for C7.  We need
> stuff that works correctly with SELINUX and systemd on CentOS-7.  So,
> IMHO, we want newer docker and RH patches.

I certainly do - it doesn't make sense to me to have a faster moving
Atomic missing the RHT patches and then put them into the rebuild. Let's
be consistent as much as possible.

Now, what the virt-SIG does is really up to them, maybe they intend to
always ship vanilla upstream -- which is fine, but IMO it would make
more sense to have a consistent story as much as possible.

Best,

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/20150427/437acf60/attachment.sig>