On 30/09/15 17:50, Johnny Hughes wrote: > 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. > Johnny, I'm a little confused so could you please just clarify? Are you proposing the 3rd party repo release file would be (re)built on the CentOS CBS and be included, or are you saying that the complete 3rd party repo (all packages) would be rebuilt on CBS? Because if it's the former, then I doubt there's any secret sauce involved, and if it's the latter then it's no longer 3rd party "elrepo", or otherwise <insert other 3rd party repo here>. Just seeking clarification as the thread reads a little ambiguous to me :-) Thanks!