[CentOS-devel] RH patches v/s vanilla docker in CentOS
Joe Brockmeier
jzb at redhat.comMon Apr 20 21:40:27 UTC 2015
- Previous message: [CentOS-devel] RH patches v/s vanilla docker in CentOS
- Next message: [CentOS-devel] RH patches v/s vanilla docker in CentOS
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On 04/20/2015 03:43 PM, Jim Perrin wrote: >> > I've pretty much decided that 'docker' in virt SIG would only track upstream >> > sources (no RH patches in it). Don't want this to sound like "I don't care >> > what anyone says", but docker upstream and many CentOS users want a build >> > which will only track upstream docker sources. Having 'docker' in virt SIG to >> > be this build sounds like the way to go. > > Agree. It would be nice to hear what the Atomic SIG folks think about > this though as they're direct consumers. FWIW, I would lean towards Docker+patches. But I assume we'd have that in the RHELAH rebuild even if not in virt SIG packages. 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/20150420/beacc257/attachment-0004.sig>
- Previous message: [CentOS-devel] RH patches v/s vanilla docker in CentOS
- Next message: [CentOS-devel] RH patches v/s vanilla docker in CentOS
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the CentOS-devel mailing list