On 01/10/2015 12:16 AM, Jim Perrin wrote: > > > On 01/09/2015 05:48 PM, Manuel Wolfshant wrote: > >> I assume the confusion is triggered by us ( me ) recommending something >> from your personal web site rather than from one "fully blessed " by >> CentOS ( whatever that would mean ) > > > So, perhaps there's a secondary question worth asking here. > > Would a repository of community contributed kickstarts be valuable under > the CentOS namespace on github and/or mirrored with git.centos.org? this question was largely unanswered at the time we did the repo the way it is now.. the problem is - the scope of this would be large enough that anyone can manage it, and everyone can get involved. But I dont want to do this as a part of the Core effort, that closes too many doors. But the SIGs are too specialised in their outlook to curate something of this nature. The only group in a suiteable place to perhaps take ownership of a resource like that would be the docs group - so we do a community contributed setup there, and the build services retail their own metadata ( which is what the atomic / docker / cloud stuff is ) as and when and where they need it. > We're already publishing kickstarts for docker, as well as some others > in https://github.com/CentOS/sig-cloud-instance-build > > Perhaps we look at restructuring/expanding that scope? I dont think we should do that, content metadata for specific roles should stay within those roles. Otherwise were just looking towards running a single svn ( or cvs?) repo with absolutely everything and the kitchen sink in there. -- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc