[CentOS-devel] Adding midonet-release to CentOS Extras (as a CATPR?)

On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 7:10 AM, Karanbir Singh <mail-lists at karan.org> wrote:
> On 30/07/15 11:17, Sandro Mathys wrote:
>
>> Right, that sounds like a plan once we're ready to be included in the
>> distro. But we face tons of deps (mostly java libs/jars) that we need
>> to bundle first. That's why I'm explicitly asking about inclusion of a
>> midonet-release package, not MidoNet as a whole. What's the criteria
>> and process for that?
>
> There really isnt one. We wont include the -release package directly
> unless the content it reflected on was also part of the CentOS
> ecosystem, either in a SIG or part of the upstream relationship ( eg.
> for stuff in CentOS Extras ).
>
> There have been conversations kicking around about getting a policy in
> place and have some sort of a formal test and eval for content standards
> in a third party repo external to CentOS - but getting something in
> place is non-trivial and clearly you guys have packaging problems at
> this point anyway.
>
> regards,

I'm a bit surprised at this: do you consider "epel-releae" to be part
of the "CentOS ecosystem"? I suppose with the tight relationship
between EPEL and RHEL, it could be. But there are many 3rdparty
groups, such as rpmforge and rpmfusion and percona, that publish their
own third party repositories quite effectively. It can be tricky to
sort out cross-compatibility and dependencies, certainly, especially
when different 3rdparty repositories publish the same comopnents or
compoents with the same metadata. The overlaps between EPEL and
RPMforge for nagios are some of my favorites, along with the
"mysql-libs" metapackage amyng alternative MySQL package repositories.

Sandro, if there are overlaps between your components and EPEL or
basic CentOS packages, I'd urge you to bite the bullet and set up your
own third party repository. It's work, but it will help avoid
confusion.