On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 5:26 PM Phil Perry <pperry at elrepo.org> wrote: > > On 14/05/2019 17:55, John R. Dennison wrote: > > On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 12:12:09PM -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > >> OK, that addresses my legacy access concerns, and there is a > >> "repodata" there to support yum access as needed. Yeah, I'd be on > >> board with migrating the obsolete components to that repo. > > > > Awesome. Now that the project has your approval it can proceed, this is > > great news! > > John, > > I had hoped that the days of these kind of facetious comments in open > source communities were well and truly behind us and that we had entered > an era where we could all demonstrate respect towards each other and > contribute in a positive and constructive manner. Please, let us not > return to the ways of the past. I'd merely taken that as slightly exasperated mocking that I'd taken so long to convince, not as a personal denigration. John, I'd meant "Yeah, I'd be on board" as a friendly acknowledgement that this would address my legacy software access concerns, not a claim that it needs my personal approval. Now, with all that in mind: Should there be some kind of comment. Should there be some kind of acknowledgement in the CentOS-Vault repo along with a pointer to such a repository of "these are so dangerously obsolete that we've overridden RHEL's publication of the original sclo channel and decided to shut these elsewhere"? What would such a channel be called? Would its contents be left permanently in the "obsolete" channel?