On 15/11/16 14:39, Julien Pivotto wrote: > On 15 Nov 14:36, Karanbir Singh wrote: >> On 14/11/16 23:16, Troy Dawson wrote: >>> Sorry, I had meant to reply earlier. >>> >>> We (PAAS Sig) need ansible for our OpenShift installer. We already >>> have it packaged in CentOS, and as it's pointed out, many other groups >>> are using that package. >>> >>> I would like to transition to using the ansible from the Config >>> Management SIG, as long as it is compatible/comparable to the ansible >>> released by RHEL and EPEL. I wasn't part of the conversation at >>> CentOS Interlock, but I sure hope that is one of the goals. >>> >>> The problem is, we can't wait until January. Our product is already >>> out and needs an ansible update to 2.2.0, so that is going to be >>> coming out soon. We plan on doing our ansible 2.2.0 release, and then >>> start a transition to using the Config Management ansible. >>> >>> That's my plan. If someone has better ideas, I won't mind hearing them. >> >> I think thats a sound plan. >> >> w.r.t inheriting changes from another SIG's content - I've spoken in the >> past about having a testable path, so every change for a component >> needed by SIG A but owned by SIG B, should come through a test(ed/able) >> path if possible. >> >> that would help reduce the number of versions we need to keep around, >> wherin a SIG had to tag locally content they were not ready to move to >> upstream yet > > That is the plan ; we would only release ansible versions that can use > other sig's installers. That is not an optional step. > > I am still waiting for CI access to get that started. it might just be me, but i dont see a request from you filed at bugs.c.o, do you have a number handy ? -- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc