[CentOS-devel] Unshipped -devel packages in CentOS Linux

Wed Nov 6 20:18:10 UTC 2019
Karanbir Singh <kbsingh at centos.org>

On 06/11/2019 20:14, Leon Fauster via CentOS-devel wrote:
> Am 06.11.19 um 21:00 schrieb Karanbir Singh:
>> On 06/11/2019 18:44, Pablo Sebastián Greco wrote:
>>> El 6/11/19 a las 14:35, Brian Stinson escribió:
>>>> I'd also like to discuss how we populate this repo/module. It would be
>>>> easiest to just dump every unshipped package in and move on, but that
>>>> doesn't help us track which of these packages are truly important
>>>> outside of building the distro.  Shipping*everything*  also
>>>> represents a
>>>> larger content set to manage if lifecycle issues come up in the future.
>>>> An alternative would be to store this definition in git (we'll need to
>>>> do that anyways), and allow folks to make pull requests to include new
>>>> content, shipping this as a separate repo would let us spin updates on
>>>> demand.
>>> I would love to see *Everything*, but it could be problematic with
>>> modules like python36 (blacklisting all the python2 rpms) and python27
>>> (blacklisting all the python3 rpms)
>> we've got precidence here in the addons repo that was shipped in past
>> versions, where content built but not shipped clearly upstream was
>> avaialble.
>> at the very least, content coming from srpms that have a corrosponding
>> binary in the other 3 repos should ship by default.
>> how much content are we talking about that comes from srpms that dont
>> have a single component that ships in the main 3 repos ?
>> Also, i would leave this repo enabled. there isnt anything conflicting
>> with the distro rpms here is there ?
> I think the repo name should be clearly communicate what it is, "addons"
> seems for me misleading. Its not only about -devel packages, for
> examples avahi-dnsconfd is build but unshipped. Therefore the name
> should communicate something like "build but not shipped and therefore
> unsupported".

to me, addons communicates just that, and has existed in the past -
also, nothing in CentOS is 'supported'.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20191106/301227a9/attachment-0006.sig>