2015-09-30 18:50 GMT+02:00 Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org>: > On 09/29/2015 01:33 PM, Trevor Hemsley wrote: >> On 29/09/15 17:35, Johnny Hughes wrote: >>> On 09/28/2015 10:58 AM, Carl George wrote: >> Howdy, >> >> There are several "release" packages in the Extras >> repository for SIGs and >> third party repositories. >> >> >> centos-release-virt-common >> centos-release-openstack >> epel-release >>>> > > EPEL is a special case .. as voted on by the CentOS Board. > > >> Other ones are SIGs .. which is the way to get a release file into >> extras. > > >> Currently there are no guidelines for other third party >> repositories to be >> included, so I wrote this document. >> >> >> https://wiki.centos.org/CarlGeorge/CATPR >> > > I am certainly open to >> discussion .. however, there exists a way to make > this happen. We >> start a Hosting SIG and those RPMs get put in there and > built on our CBS. >> >> That appears to rule out elrepo and IUS ever being allowed to get into >> extras which seems like a change of policy from before when it was: >> "come up with some criteria by which we can make impartial decisions". >> In both cases, they do not target CentOS alone, they exist to serve the >> entire EL community. Making them build in CBS would then rule out their >> repos being used on RHEL and/or SL. I don't think this is a good idea >> either. > > Well .. RDO, who produces RPMs for RHEL, builds things on CBS. > > Packages built on CBS could also work on SL. > > I am NOT saying we can never get other repo release files in > CentOS-Extras .. I am just saying that there is an easy way to make it > happen right now and that is a SIG. > > I am only 11% of the CentOS Board .. so I'm sure there is room for > movement in many directions on this. But, personally, if we are > offering an open program to get things into CentOS, I don't like making > exceptions. Everyone thinks THEIR exception is a good one and people > want to keep their secret sauce (or build logs, root logs, or build > root, etc) private. I would rather everyone work thorough our community > setup. I think that is better for CentOS users. They have one place to > go to in order to find stuff. If everyone uses it then it is better for > everyone in the long run. > > We are having ppc64 and ppc64le being redone on our hardware and in a > way that it can be integrated into CBS and this infrastructure. The > people doing that did not necessarily think that was a great idea either > .. but I also think that will be better in the long run too. > > However, by all means, if users and the board want to create this > mechanism, this is the place to hash it out. > > Excellent answer. My PoV as a SIG member: Until then, EL community has been scattered, and now we have a common place for people wanting to build features/products on top of EL while *respecting* that diversity. (CBS is *Community* Build System not CentOS) If you care about compatibility against RHEL/SL/whatever => contribute more CI against packages to detect incompatibilities. In one year, for RDO packages, we found a *single* compatibility issue with RHEL 7.1 was released, and it was solved rather quickly. For the record, we had the very same issue internally with RHEL 7.0. That's quite minor, and I prefer improving SIG infrastructure rather wasting efforts on creating a new one from scratch. CentOS is saving us a lot of efforts and time by providing that infrastructure, so that such issues are not relevant to consider doing otherwise. Kudos to the Core SIG for their efforts. H.